Besides, as in the Athenian trial of Socrates, not only do we not know how many should vote one way and not another to make our decision, but we are allowing our decisions to be determined by a mathematical percentage that could not care less about our wellbeing.

I know full well bringing Aristotle into use would anger my friends who are strict scientists. They hate him!

But I feel in the Twenty-first Century, we desperately need him. Yes, he made many mistakes, like thinking heavy bodies fall faster than light ones and the Earth is the centre of the Universe, flies have four legs and women have fewer teeth than men, etc., etc. But that's not his fault! It's the fault of the people for not challenging his thoughts no matter how good they were. Even mega-geniuses like Albert Einstein's theories ought to be brought into question although it's important to think out your objections carefully before you voice them; you don't want to embarrass yourself.

But it has gone too far! The scientists make the things he was incredibly talented at, like ethics, epistemology, logic, his understanding of universals and especially his knowledge of how politics works that we really need today, worthless because of the damage he did to science.

We normally think of Socrates who disliked Democracy because it panders to the interests of the ruler and not to the interests of the people, deceiving them into believing material turnover is happiness.

But the might of criticisms against Democracy came from Aristotle who carefully explained the fallacy of argumentum ad populum. Democracy, he argued, is based on the assumption that all people are equal in thought and reason and therefore each person should have an equal say in how things should be decided. The problem with this, thought Aristotle, is some people clearly think more rationally than others. For example, one person may vote according with the actions or policies of the politician in question, while others may vote a way because the politician is attractive and they are in love with him or her. Worse, he argued, it is almost always the case the most reasonable argument is held by the minority because few people think rationally against their own desires. Besides, as in the Athenian trial of Socrates, not only do we not know how many should vote one way and not another to make our decision, but we are allowing our decisions to be determined by a mathematical percentage that could not care less about our wellbeing. — Michael Lee

So you want a revival to lend some 'appeal to authority' weight behind 'stuff you reckon' against those pesky scientists with their 'falsifiable theories' and their 'evidence'. Damn those scientists, how dare they undermine what we very strongly reckon is the case! — Isaac

But it has gone too far! The scientists make the things Aristotle was incredibly talented at, like ethics, epistemology, logic, his understanding of universals and especially his knowledge of how politics works that we really need today, worthless because of the damage he did to science. — Michael Lee

“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
― Aristotle, Metaphysics