{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02385496183206107, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0019083969465648854, 'mean_word_length': 5.028735632183908, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Democracy of the Dead? The Relevance of Majority Opinion in Theology

Chapter 11 explores whether the majority opinion in Christian theology should be deferred to, or strongly preferred, whether it be the majority opinion over the history of the church (as in G. K. Chesterton’s “democracy of the dead”) or the majority opinion of contemporary theologians. It is argued that because of the vast differences in accessible evidence between past and present-day theologians, diachronic majority opinion is not a good indicator of where the truth lies. In the synchronic case, ignorance of minority arguments, biases, selection effects, and the difficulty to deciding who gets to vote present many opportunities for majorities to be wrong. Finally, it is considered whether the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit could rescue the democracy of the dead, but the conclusion is reached that given the gentle way God corrects us, diachronic majority opinion, apart from belief in a very basic set of truths, is not epistemically bolstered by the Spirit.