Original median voter theorem paper, Duncan Black in 1948
Let us suppose that a decision is to be determined by vote of a committee. The
members of the committee may meet in a single room, or they may be scattered
over an area of the country as are the electors in a parliamentary constituency.
Proposals are advanced, we assume, in the form of motions on a particular topic
or in favor of one of a number of candidates. We do not inquire into the genesis
of the motions but simply assume that given motions have been put forward.
In the case of the selection of candidates, we assume that determinate candidates
have offered themselves for election and that one is to be chosen by means of
voting. For convenience we shall speak as if one of a number of alternative mo-
tions, and not candidates, was being selected.
Let there be n members in the committee, where n is odd. We suppose that
an ordering of the points on the horizontal axis representing motions exists,
rendering the preference curves of all members single-peaked. The points on
the horizontal axis corresponding to the members’ optimums are named O, 02,
03, . . . , in the order of their occurrence. The middle or median optimum
will be the (n + I)/2th, and, in Figure 3, only this median optimum, the one im-
mediately above it and the one immediately below it are shown
Anyway, this is really a pedagogic question. How best should we teach politics? Some people advocate that we should disregard the MVT because it is both “obvious” and “false”. Setting that contradiction aside, I think the underlying assumption that only theories with perfect data fit should be taught is wrong. By the same logic, physics should not teach Newtownian mechanics because it is wrong relative to quantum mechanics. You can’t just give the reader quantum mechanics, you need to start with a theory they can understand then update it.
Original median voter theorem paper, Duncan Black in 1948
Anyway, this is really a pedagogic question. How best should we teach politics? Some people advocate that we should disregard the MVT because it is both “obvious” and “false”. Setting that contradiction aside, I think the underlying assumption that only theories with perfect data fit should be taught is wrong. By the same logic, physics should not teach Newtownian mechanics because it is wrong relative to quantum mechanics. You can’t just give the reader quantum mechanics, you need to start with a theory they can understand then update it.