In today’s society of ‘trend’ culture, pluralistic ignorance (Pi) dictates that the majority go along with an idea that is thought incorrect, but assumed popular with others. Court rooms today deal with the same issue of Pi with juries having to sort out as individuals a consensus of collective conscious that bears fruit for democratic justice.
If I have one bias brought to light during my presentation at Stanford, it is intellectual and cultural activism. The Grand Rounds allowed me today to speak to a matter of popular assumption where testifying in court is routine, adversarial, and not proactive in bringing about changes within community.
In most of the cases where I personally testified, I have witnessed jury members paying close attention to my testimony, and looking past the adversarial court room moves by attorneys to find the conclusion that ‘makes best sense’ in spite of the popular trend.
Thank you colleagues at Stanford U Psychiatry in allowing me to ‘opine’ on topics of relevant expert testimony before you this week. The questions posed to me after the presentation by you, the participants suggest that you ‘got’ the point of opinion bringing about change within community, and ways to ensure the democratic process stays alive.