Unanimous decisions are less reliable


[Read the post]


Great post. Totally agree, 100%.





I wanna see that Koala Guy movie!


Without watching the video, is the idea that there’s a maximum level of certainty based solely on empirical thought, so when a group surpasses that level of certainty, some other factors must be involved?

(Or, to use the example from the post: when everyone agrees who robbed the bank, it’s probably because the police rigged the lineup?)


Was it a voice lineup?


The idea is that if the level of agreement passes the threshold of certainty for the given factors, something’s likely afoot.

For example if the line up is between apples and bananas, 100% certainty is not unreasonable. However, if you do a coin toss 100 times and come up with heads every time, there’s probably something wrong with your coin.


Was expecting “science confirms water is wet”


Yeah, this isn’t new; the law/tradition at the time of Temple Judaism was that, if the judges were unanimous in someone’s guilt, the subject was acquitted, due to the point that, if they all thought that the person was guilty, there was something systemically wrong with the evidence. (In practice, the trial was usually suspended for a few days while they dug a bit deeper looking for evidence in the person’s defense).


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.