TY - JOUR
T1 - The Persuasiveness of Democratic Majorities
AU - Goodin, Robert E.
AU - Estlund, David
PY - 2004/5
Y1 - 2004/5
N2 - Under the assumptions of the standard Condorcet Jury Theorem, majority verdicts are virtually certain to be correct if the competence of voters is greater than one-half, and virtually certain to be incorrect if voter competence is less than one-half. But which is the case? Here we turn the Jury Theorem on its head, to provide one way of addressing that question. The same logic implies that, if the outcome saw 60 percent of voters supporting one proposition and 40 percent the other, then average voter competence must either be 0.60 or 0.40. We still have to decide which, but limiting the choice to those two values is a considerable aid in that.
AB - Under the assumptions of the standard Condorcet Jury Theorem, majority verdicts are virtually certain to be correct if the competence of voters is greater than one-half, and virtually certain to be incorrect if voter competence is less than one-half. But which is the case? Here we turn the Jury Theorem on its head, to provide one way of addressing that question. The same logic implies that, if the outcome saw 60 percent of voters supporting one proposition and 40 percent the other, then average voter competence must either be 0.60 or 0.40. We still have to decide which, but limiting the choice to those two values is a considerable aid in that.
KW - Condorcet Jury Theorem
KW - epistemic democracy
KW - voter competence
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34248049876&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1470594X04042960
DO - 10.1177/1470594X04042960
M3 - Article
SN - 1470-594X
VL - 3
SP - 131
EP - 142
JO - Politics, Philosophy and Economics
JF - Politics, Philosophy and Economics
IS - 2
ER -