my theory

If a majority opinion defines whether a position is morally correct, then it shouldn’t matter if the ration is 51-49 or 99-1: after all, a small majority is still a majority.

Anyway, if you would imagine a society of 10 people, where 8 are cannibals, they would clearly be able to take advantage of this to the detriment of the minority. Does this necessarily say that the concept of “cannibalism” is right? All you can say is that it’s right for that society. However, your theory doesn’t seem to allow you to say what YOU yourself think on not just this issue, but all issues. Clearly, if you aren’t able to answer any moral dilemma without first taking a consensus vote, you won’t be able to take a stand on any position.

HOWEVER. I bet you actually do know that actions like like stealing, crime, torture etc are not socially acceptable behaviour. At the very least, you’d have some idea, and I’m sure you didn’t go and survey all the people in your neighbourhood to find out before deciding on a position. The point I’m getting at is that you actually form your own consensus on what is right and wrong; this is all done prior to any such 50-50 close call. Essentially, even if you did go ask everyone, someone had to be have been the FIRST to make a choice whether something is right or wrong –and that first person can’t rely on any past data/statistics.

Jam it back in, in the dark.