Topics Rationality

Question My husband critised me for holding on to my opinion despite persuasive opposing views from others in our discussion group; his point being that, as a general rule, the opinion held by the majority is more likely to be right than the opinion held by the minority. He continued to say that if he was in similar circumstances he would begin to doubt his own certainty and concede that the majority must be right. Although I see some merit in his point in some situations I would never concede on something on which I was certain, regardless of pressure, unless I was convinced by facts I hadn't originally considered, etc. Two questions: Am I just being stubborn and how does one determine when we are simply being stubborn as opposed to being justifiably strong-willed?

Accepted:
September 25, 2008

Comments

Thanks for your question. It contains two very different sub-questions:

1. Is the opinion held by the majority more likely to be right than that held by the minority?

2. Is one justified in holding onto an opinion in spite of persuasive counter-arguments to the contrary.

I should note also that you suggest that you are *certain* of your opinion on the issue in question. That is a relevant factor also.

Now, concerning 1: It is perhaps too high-handed simply to *dismiss* the opinion of the majority, though in some cases, that may well be justified. (Just imagine a naive or in some way very confused group of people.) On the other hand, there's no good inference from that fact that most people agree on something, to the conclusion that they must be right. To be safe, perhaps the best route is to reexamine your reasons for your contrary opinion, and so long as they still seem solid, then you're entitled to hold onto it in spite of what others think.

Concerning 2: What if the others give persuasive counter-arguments. If you really find those arguments persuasive, shouldn't you give up your opposing view?

Perhaps, however, by 'persuasive' you mean that the counter-arguments seem to have *some* force but are not quite convincing. It's hard to know what to say about this in the abstract, but there are plenty of cases in which "reasonable people can disagree" because there are somewhat forceful arguments on both sides of an issue. Here, however, just because there are more people on the other side, and you're alone on your side, *that* doesn't show that you should abandon your convictions and run with the herd! I suggest that the best alternative is simply to keep talking and, depending on the topic, do some research on it.