The Argument from Majority is a classical methodology for using it determine the veracity of an opinion or statement. However, it is fraught with very dangerous pitfalls if used incorrectly. We see that using the majority vote of all peoples of a country to determine whether or not a particular course of medical technology should be used in hospitals cannot be feasible, either for practical considerations or for lack of information, knowledge or expert skill in determining whether or not this technology should be available.
A Hospital cannot rely on the majority of its clients to determine whether or not it should use its funding to buy a dialysis machine, because invariably, the money would be used for medical emergencies already pressing or to pay the workers more. We see that majorities and their opinions may or may not be helpful in determining the allocation of funds. Additionally, including simply the Board of Trustees on a vote, would be very non-intuitive. Perhaps, the Hospital is in a location where pregnancies are not common, and the Board, may believe that Pregnancies have a low cost relative to other medical conditions, and therefore an extra maternity wing in the Hospital could be a boon for financially keeping the Hospital in the Green. The Hospital therefore cannot consider their vote as being absolute. We see that Hospitals generally value the opinions of the surgeons and medical experts in their fields to determine the case of whether or not a treatment or technology should be funded and carried out. Why? Because the basic majority isn't helpful nor meaningful nor is it an accurate display of what ought to be!
In 1934 Hitler rose to power in a perfectly legitimate fashion on the cards. He received a 99% landslide victory to become the High Chancellor of Germany. Admittedly, much of the vote was dependent heavily on brute force and threats, but we see that a majority position isn't necessarily accurate or right morally! While I'm not saying that Democracy got Hitler to power, to simply make the claim that a Majority rule represents the reality or truth, is sadly mistaken. (see here for more elaboration).
Why do we have democratic elections that are free and fair? For representation. The people need to be represented democratically because that is the means to which we can determine their active role in politically shaping the country. Lack of this principal is an expression of lack of representation, because the needs of the people are being ignored in favor of other considerations.
Democracy requires a certain degree of literacy and education. I believe that modern western free and fair electoral voting would have no place in ancient Greece, where Democracy has its birth, because the fundamental distinctions of class - i.e. land-owners vs. slaves, women and children, would be affected by their overall marginalization from society. Giving illiterate people the right to responsible government is dangerous because invariably that don't have the social knowledge to make informed, accurate decisions about who to vote for.
With this in mind, we can now turn to determining whether or not a belief, fact or statement is true. If the majority of experts in their field, reject the alternative then we have more reason to accept the statement as being true. It doesn't prove it, even in a non-absolute sense - it is only more likely to be acceptable. The majority of scientists in the earlier part of the 20th Century concurred that Pluto was the 9th planet. Today, the majority reject that hypothesis. All we can assume is that it is more likely to be true.
The experts of the Torah are the Rabbinical Scholars. They are the ones we should look up to in determining the validity of interpretation and understanding. Specifically the Rabbis who represent the Masora - the traditional passing down of Divine Wisdom from Moses until today, are the ones who are most capable in determining the truth. In fact, a simple summary from the time of Moses until today of these Rabbis, is a vast majority of intellectual opinion. On this basis alone, a unanimous decision has tremendous weight.
