EDIT: ADDRESSED BY EDIT TO ABOVE
Well to begin with I don't think a person needs to know even close to that amount of information to be justified in their vote and, moreover, a person can know all of that information and still vote for stupid reasons. Say I am an uneducated black person living in the segregation era in a southern American state. All I know is one candidate supports passing a civil rights bill on my behalf and the other is a bitter racist. I vote for the non-racist. Given this justification for my vote why should my vote be reduced to almost nothing because I don't know anything else about the candidates, economics, political science etc.?
On the other hand, I could be capable of answering every question on that test correctly and still believe that the book is a lie and Barack Obama is really a secret Muslim. I can't tell you the number of people I've met who have taken Poli Sci, Econ (even four semsesters worth!), history and can recite candidate talking points verbatim who are still basically clueless about everything that matters.
"Well to begin with I don't think a person needs to know even close to that amount of information to be justified in their vote and, moreover, a person can know all of that information and still vote for stupid reasons."
So which is it?
"Given this justification for my vote why should my vote be reduced to almost nothing because I don't know anything else about the candidates, economics, political science etc.?"
Because the civil rights guy has pardoned a convicted slave trader who contributed to his gubernatorial campaign, and the "r...
We've had these for a year, I'm sure we all know what to do by now.
This thread is for the discussion of Less Wrong topics that have not appeared in recent posts. If a discussion gets unwieldy, celebrate by turning it into a top-level post.