4 ms·
> Whereas an accidental moderate's opinions will be scattered over a broad range, but will, like those of the intentional moderate, average to about 50. This i
by elyobo 7y ago
> Whereas an accidental moderate's opinions will be scattered over a broad range, but will, like those of the intentional moderate, average to about 50.
This is only the case if left and right are equally right and wrong, which is unlikely to be the case. The average place of an accidental moderate could be anywhere, even to the left of the left or the right of right right.
- lukevdp 7y agoYou are not a moderate if you are “left of the left” or “right of the right”.
- elyobo 7y agoNo, but his definition of "moderate" isn't anything to do with those, it's just "thinks for themselves instead of taking on a group of positions" - which can land you anywhere, potentially.
- robbrown451 7y agoIt's not about whether they are equally right and wrong, but if they are equally far from the median or average viewpoint. And I'd say it is very likely that they are. Almost by definition, in the sense that right and left are relative terms. That being the case, I think PG is correct that accidental moderates should tend to average in the middle. In general.
- elyobo 7y agoI don't think it works out that way. Thinking about politics as a single left/right continuum might make it seem like it would, but * measuring distance to know how "far" they are is hard, so hard to say how far any given position is from the "median or average" viewpoint * hard also to measure not just the distance, but how common such a position is, which you'd need to do as well * harder still to do this over many different positions * harder still when you realise that, of course, the left/right thing is an incredibly simplified (although sometimes useful) way of looking at a complicated set of topics For any individual "moderate" it seems very unlikely that they will end up "in the middle" even across a range of political topics. For an aggregate of all "moderates", then it'll end up somewhere, but no reason to assume that it will be in the middle of things (even if you could determine where such a middle even was).
- alexandercrohde 7y agoSure. A more mathematical description would be "standard deviation of beliefs across numerous issues predicts thinking for oneself" Of course, thinking for oneself might not correlate with being correct. I can think of numerous issues where those who challenge the status quo are more likely to be wrong (e.g. medicine).
- elyobo 7y agoThat sounds entirely reasonable, but was not at all what he said in the statement I quoted.