GP Essay Essay Example

GP Essay Essay Example GP Essay Essay GP Essay Essay It would be very difficult to argue that the view of the majority is always right. Would advise against this. Different ways to approach discussion (not mutually exclusive): The view Of majority is right. But not always (can be wrong). View of majority is usually right. But in limited circumstances, wrong. View of majority is right. But actually very limited. More likely to go wrong. Or as in this essay, no emphasis on the extent of right or wrong of the majority view. Simple evaluation of the proposition itself. The view of majority is right for certain reasons. But it is not necessarily the view of majority itself that is right, but underlying values/ principles it promotes and represents. The adoption of the view of the majority alludes to a democratic model of governance and organization of a group of separate and distinct individuals living and interacting with one another, where decision-making is driven by the mandate of the majority. Contextually, it may apply to smaller communities such as families or business organizations, or may apply to a political society in general, where leadership and policy are determined based n majorities election. The validity of the majorities view has long been regarded as highly contentious, attributable to its paradoxical nature, aptly described by Sir Winston Churchill as the worst form of governing a country, save for all other systems that have since been attempted. While some fervently advocate such an approach, it has also been subject to strong denunciation by others who are quick point out that democratic structures blindly assume that the view of majority is always right. They argue that this may not necessarily hold true in all circumstances. : In this essay, we shall examine several justifications that vindicate the adoption of the majorities view, as well as reasons exposing the fallacious character of the statement alleging that the hue of the majority is always right. It is argued here that while the democratic approach remains largely salient, we must be cautious to guard against its weaknesses, in recognizing that it engenders social and political repercussions that need to be properly acknowledged and addressed. Paragraph 1 Tries to set out the context and scope of the discussion. Introduces ideas of association that may help in defining what the view of the majority means. Also sets out the rough outline of argumentation (i. E. What the essay aims etc achieve and how it is focused on the topic and some evaluation). At the outset, it is easy to see why some hold strong conviction that the vim of the majority is right. Firstly, by ensuring the need for a majority threshold to be secured, the opinions, preferences and demands of different individual within a particular community can at least be accounted for in a fair and balanced manner. This minimizes the chances of biased or skewed presentation, which would be far more likely to occur in the case where the views of only a particular minority are respected. Paragraph 2 The first point brought across is one of the justifications explaining why the view of the majority is right fair and balanced representation. Notwithstanding this however, there are several pragmatic limitations, which hamper the effectiveness of such democratic systems in allowing the views most members of a certain group to be reflected and expressed. This is because proportionate representation is desirable only where most member f the group in question are capable of making fully informed and rational choices, such as to reach to a well-evaluated decision overall. Yet, asymmetrical knowledge, resources and talent will inevitably exist to sabotage the ability of many within society to make such CEQ Lully balanced judgments. This may be especially pertinent with respect to less developed societies, where most have not experienced the benefits of education, and where there is a lack of infrastructural support to enable the widespread distribution of information or equip individuals with the necessary skills and sources to make enlightened choices. For example, in Thailand and Malaysia, inhabitants of rural areas often lack educational opportunities, culminating in an inadequate understanding of the policies and manifestos electoral candidates. As a result, they simply vote for the sake of doing so, without careful consideration of its wider, far-reaching implications. Furthermore, some who fail to appreciate the significance of their political views may also give away their votes in exchange for meager remuneration promised to them by corrupt officials, thus allowing unscrupulous politician o remain in power. This perpetuates a downward cycle of unsound police undertaken, inept leadership and social inequity, a clear indication that upholding the view of an undiscerning majority can impose severely detrimental effects on society. In other words, a tyranny of the wise by the majority may ensue, as forewarned by reputed philosopher, Plato, who voiced deep concerns over the potential subjugation of those better equip to make decisions that would shape the growth and progression of society, contrast with an ill-educated and incompetent majority. Paragraph 3 Here, we are evaluating the first point, by providing reasons explaining why the view of the majority is not always right. Firstly, asymmetrical knowledge, resources and talent might impinge ability the majority to make right choices. Example is provided to substantiate thief point. Moreover, championing the majorities view may promote a herd mental where individuals within the majority may be easily influenced because the may feel pressure to succumb to a particular view espoused by many other Rather than analyzing the underlying rationale and prudence of their choice; hey are swayed by mere numbers. This suggests that the majority view RL be largely fuelled by an emotional response rather than a genuine reflection of what members of society truly want and think is right. A study by researcher, Main Cousin, at Oxford University, provides evidence to suggest that humans do possess a behavioral inclination to conform to the major rule. While this implies that democratic principles are in line with our nature, tendencies as humans, this does not validate the proposition that the majority is always right. Quite the contrary, it indicates that we usually lean awards the view of the majority not because it is right, but because it is an instinctive response generated by the fact of our existence within a group individuals. Paragraph 4 Secondly, underlying the majorities view might be a herd mentality. Example is provided to substantiate this point. Despite these factors, the majority view may still be right because it protects society against an abuse Of power. By enforcing the view Of most individuals in the community in question, a concentration of power or essential resources in the hands of a select few is mitigated against. Essentially, it enables a more even distribution of power across members of society, thus providing a check and balance against autocratic rule, which may prompt those in power to subscribe to corrupt practices due to the lack of appropriate censure. This is illustrated by the toppling of the Marcos Empire in Philippines, where the restoration of democracy managed to absolve civilians of the politicians corrupt regime. Rendering leaders or decision- makers answerable to the views of the majority causes them to become accountable for policies drafted and measures implemented because a allure to comply with expectations of the masses could subject them to the risk of being ousted, removing them high positions of power or authority. Therefore, advancing the majorities view incentives leaders to constantly assess the opinions and demands of most individuals and act in a manner that corresponds to those interests, rather than their own. Paragraph 5 Here, we are providing the second reason which explains why the majority is right protects people against an abuse of power arising from overcompensation of power in hands of minority. Example provided to substantiate this point. However, a potent backlash of this is that leaders may resort to populist measures, maneuvering their policies to satisfy the demands of those whom they serve, without actual consideration of whether their actions will ultimately benefit the community at large. This is problematic because as discussed earlier, the majority may lack accurate notions of what they want, or what is best for them. At the same time, simply pandering to the whims of the majority will inadvertently sideline the interests of the dissenting minority) thus obstructing the impartial protection of rights and freedoms of all individuals within society.