(April 26, 2012 at 12:23 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: I've been noticing an increasing number of people saying that an appeal to authority argument isn't fallacious if said person is actually knowledgable in the subject matter. This doesn't make sense to me.
It makes complete sense to me.
Say some one appeals to the authority of, ooooooooooooooooh I dunno... a theologian - then we're talking about an "expert" in made up shit. Therefore, appealing to that authority gains zero credibility unless that authority can back up their "wisdom" with hard facts and evidence.
Whereas if you are a layman debating, say, a legal matter with another layman, then appealing to the authority of a solicitor would gain some weight to an argument, as you'd presume the solicitor would have some expertise in said field - which of course is based on factual information as well.
You are currently experiencing a lucky and very brief window of awareness, sandwiched in between two periods of timeless and utter nothingness. So why not make the most of it, and stop wasting your life away trying to convince other people that there is something else? The reality is obvious.
