Can the scientific method be applied in choosing a candidate to be voted?

[rodsky]

---

I ask this question in light of the upcoming presidential elections in this country. Let us say you were an undecided voter--you simply cannot decide who among the candidates you will vote. Now suppose you will indeed vote for one of them (thereby eliminating the possibility of you abstaining), who will your pick be?

Now if you choose one candidate because you believe in what he says, then you're relying on your faith instead of reason in choosing him. But what if you had an option to be scientific about your choice, would you choose based on logic/reason/the scientific method?

To begin this discussion, let's try to kick it off by talking about data. To have a reliable means to count certain positive attributes of each candidate (and perhaps even negative ones, if that is what would satisfy your criteria of who NOT to vote for), we must collect data off them, i.e. data on accomplishments, data on past decisions, data on effectiveness as a leader, effectiveness as a manager, and so on.

Now, can you add more to this list, and what are your thoughts on voting scientifically. And, do you think voting scientifically is equivalent to voting wisely?

-RODION

[YJOB]

i say let us also include data on financial reports sir, kung pila ang nadawat (pork barrel, etc) and pila ang actual projects nga nabuhat with report sa gasto.

[rodsky]

i say let us also include data on financial reports sir, kung pila ang nadawat (pork barrel, etc) and pila ang actual projects nga nabuhat with report sa gasto.

That's a good one, keep them coming.

I just realized though, that we have to assume that the source of all this data is untainted/unbiased. More often than not, in reality, reports such as these sometimes have some imbalance, depending on who is delivering the report. But let's assume the data is in "pristine" state.

BTW, please do NOT present statements such as the following in this thread:

"But what's the point? Even if you chose for the most logical candidate, chances are he/she won't win because of the scientific reasons you underlined, but because of tactics such as cheating, etc. etc."

We are not concerned about that issue in this thread--we are only concerned with what can be done as regards to coming up with a scientific way to choose a candidate--thus the assumption is that the elections will be fair and clean.

-RODION

[NASYO]

thing to consider:
1. don't let your emotions cross your way upon choosing/selecting

Scientifically, we can choose a candidate.
I will use probabilities.

[rodsky]

thing to consider:
1. don't let your emotions cross your way upon choosing/selecting

That's already a given.

-RODION

[NASYO]

For voter or for worse..

[lomotel]

I prefer the method of choosing the "LESSER EVIL" in voting this coming election.

[rodsky]

I prefer the method of choosing the "LESSER EVIL" in voting this coming election.

Noynoy vs. Villar..certainly the former is the lesser evil for me

Can "evil" be defined via the scientific method? No. And thus, your post has no merit in this discussion. Again, I urge posters to please try to stick on topic.

Again, read the FIRST post and truly understand it, before posting anything. Thank you.

-RODION

[lomotel]

Lesser evil means less corrupt. How can you scientifically prove the corruption? Simply by using statistics

[rodsky]

Lesser evil means less corrupt. How can you scientifically prove the corruption? Simply by using statistics

Your input is appreciated, but kindly refrain from using the thread to underline a specific candidate. Thank you.

-RODION