A new proposal
in the previous
case about the bill
on education, the vote of teachers
should have a
of 10 and the vote of engineers of 1.
For a bill on mines
the coefficients would be reversed:
1 for teachers and 10 for engineers.
The factor 10 is used here only symbolically.
The more specialised the question e.g.
application of the
pesticide Z-R 14 be approved?",
the higher should be the factor.
The more general the question,
the lower the factor.
If it comes
to the appointment
at the highest governmental level
(for the Prime Minister or the President of the Republic)
there should be no factor.
All votes would have equal weight.
is it impossible that an engineer, from personal interest,
might have studied the problems of education in such depth
and have accumulated so much knowledge that his opinion
would be valuable?
Why should you condemn his vote to have only the factor 1?
For this problem we could,
in addition to
kind of test to prove how
informed every citizen is
on a particular problem.
Before he gives his opinion on
the main question:
"Do you think
we should extend time
spent in the high-school by one year?"
he has to answer
questions which show
he has understood the question
fully and can answer it seriously.
• Whether he has studied the problem.
he has taken into account all the
parameters that accompany the problem and
• has considered the impact of his decision.
1. Do you know how long attendance is in high-school today?
2. Do you know how long it is in the other European countries?
3. How much additional knowledge do you
think there is since
we had the last school reform?
4. What increase in the budget of the
Ministry of Education will
an additional year in high-school cause?
5. What do you think will be the impact
on the national economy,
if the young people enter the University or the production line
a year later?
we asked a group of education specialists,
they would certainly have given us much better
examples of questions for such a test)
If it is proved by the preliminary questions
interviewee is fully aware of what this
change means and what the implications are,
then his vote has
receive the highest weighting.
If it turns out that he is completely unaware,
then we do not
need to take
his answer very seriously.
With such a test
there is less risk
that a particularly
gifted orator may dazzle his listeners
and lead them to vote in his favour.