Tyrant

A Tyrant: an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution

The Wisdom of the Crowd

 Let us talk about democracy, this is the idea that the majority vote wins. But why should the majority vote matter? The majority vote counts because of the “wisdom of the crowd”, the idea that the collective opinion of a group of individuals is smarter than individual experts. This idea is employed in a variety of aspects including problem-solving, innovation, predictions, and our area of focus “Decision-Making”. The overall concept is that the average value of estimates tends to be more accurate than a single estimate. And so the idea that the masses are wiser because they represent an average of collective intelligence and experience is often assumed. However, this concept may not hold true in reality due to various factors that can significantly impact the accuracy of the assumption.I have explored in previous posts how easily a group or individuals can be influenced by simply implanting a simple idea (Inception). But in this post, we explore some concepts which if looked at critically may make you think twice before trusting the decision of a crowd. 

Herd Mentality

 We are shaped by our experiences but imagine losing your individuality and being compelled by something that makes you do something that you wouldn’t on your own. Herd Mentality is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when an individual adopts the beliefs, behaviors, or attitudes of the majority in a group usually at the expense of their judgment or individuality. It may be beneficial if the cause is noble but if the crowd is driven by a sinister motive and perverse judgment, then it is scary because the judgment of the individual is impaired and an irrational crowd is a dangerous one, often resorting to any means necessary to fight for a cause. If individuals take the time to sit, reason, and think, they will be horrified by the ideology of certain movements.

Social Conformity: There is safety in numbers, several social experiments have been conducted, for example where individuals choose a wrong choice not because they think it is right but simply because the majority chooses so. It's "food for thought", how many times as an individual have you gone beyond what you think is right or adopted ideas that you cannot really understand simply because everyone else is doing it? 

Abilene Paradox

 Have you ever been in a meeting or gathering and the entire meeting decides on a conclusion that is ridiculous and afterward you sit down to think, “But why did we just do that ?”. If you can relate then what you might have experienced is what is called the Abilene Paradox, it is a Phenomenon in which a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that none of them want to take but say they do because they think it's best for the team. It is a paradox because the course of action decided is counter to most or all individuals in the group, while each individual believes it to be aligned with the preferences of the others. 

The Big Lie

 Adolf Hitler! I first came across the idea of the “big Lie” when I read about Hitler, the idea is that you tell a lie so big that it is Soo unbelievable it is believable. laughable I know but follow me keenly. We all know that people are capable of lies, small lies some huge, some jaw-dropping. We believe this because we are also capable of it but sometimes it is hard to fathom that someone or a group of people can come up with “a big lie” because in principle we not can therefore no one can and that’s the deception because there are some that can come up with a lie that is Soo big and blatantly not true that the only evidence for its truthfulness is that it is Soo big that it is impossible for it not to be true. And according to Adolf Hitler the bigger the lie, the more believable. You see there are groups of individuals either serious geniuses, psychopathy, or seriously motivated evil doers who will tell the biggest lies with impunity, and the masses will follow just because they believe that the lie is too big. 

 "All this was inspired by the principle – which is quite true within itself – that in the big lie, there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.

It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying."

— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

For an honest person, it is a common understanding that it is easier to resolve issues with a rational individual rather than convincing a crowd that may be deceived by itself or influenced by a sinister individual. Therefore, it is evident that the majority cannot always be trusted.

Here is a thought-provoking question for you. Our society today often promotes the idea of "doing what feels right not what is actually right" without considering basic truths. People even go as far as identifying themselves as animals (cats dogs, wolves). It's rare to find meaningful conversations in this kind of society (the woke people). Given this, do you believe that it's safe to trust the majority to make decisions for you, or do you think that dictatorship is a better alternative?