<p>So I actually did not time myself for 25 minutes to write this essay because I get really scared and write a lot of bull**** down. So I just started a stopwatch and wrote. It took me 30 minutes.
p.s. I reread it and it sounds more like a story than an essay o_O
p.p.s, I may lied about some facts. So yea.. SORRY!</p>
<p>thanks (:</p>
<p>Is the opinion of the majority- in government or in any circumstances- a poor guide?</p>
<pre><code>The opinion of the majority is not always the best guide. In the Grapes of Wrath, most farmers migrated to the west in hope of a new future. But the family only ended up with hunger and aggravation. The same goes for science. Should you always follow the crowd or be different and go your own way? Galileo Galilei rebelled against the church's belief and was thrown in house imprisonment.
The goal for science is prove what is said to be correct. During the 1600s, there was a scientist named Galileo Galilei. His idea of the universe was a heliocentric diagram - sun in the middle with planets circling around it. His proof was Mars. It was circling around on it's orbit facing the sun. However, it completely contradicted with the church's idea. Going with the opinions of the majority (at that time) would not only be a poor guide, but also a dangerous guide. Instead of checking whether Galilei's belief was correct, he was thrown into house imprisonment for life.
In John Steinbeck's novel The Grapes of Wrath, it takes place during the Great Depression. As we all know, during the 1930s there were dust storms, drought, and poverty. The Joads family, like so many others, decided the best way to earn money and be prosperous was by going west: California. They decided that when they found a pamphlet stating there were thousands of jobs offered in a variety of fruits, nuts, etc. But they were not rewarded. Instead they were cheated, bullied, and tortured till the end. First, instead of being paid a livable wage, they were haggled to a price of about 5 cents per crate. Next, they were teased with nicknames such as "Oakies" or "Reds". And lastly, they were harassed. In one scene of the book, when a tired, constantly-cheated-on farmer decided to tell everyone about his experiences with "wages", the police not only beat him up, but also shot a innocent bystander. This was definitely not the experience any farmers during the 1930s hoped for, but the majority realized that after.
Going against majority can lead to a better result. If the farmers all didn't go to California, maybe the results would be better. In a few years, congress passed a law for mandatory farming techniques and equipments. If Galileo Galilei didn't stand up to what he believed in, maybe we would still be gullible and believe the geocentric theory. Indeed there are circumstances where going with the majority would be correct, like not jumping off a cliff, but demonstrated through literature and history, the opinion of the majority may not always be the best guide.
</code></pre>