There are times in the pursuit of any knowledge--science, history, philosophy, etc.--when we have to rely on the testimony of others. What makes someone a reliable authority? In this video, I discuss the difference between legitimate and illegitimate appeals to authority.
NOTES
- Appeal to authority- accepting the testimony of others as a grounds for belief or possibly knowledge
- Types:
- Eye-witness testimony
- Opinions informed by experience
- Expert research
- Types:
- What makes an authority legitimate?
- Expertise
- Conversant with all views on the topic
- Vote of confidence from colleagues
- Corroboration
- Trustworthiness
- Honest
- Objective/unbiased
- Sober-minded
- Thorough
- Expertise
- Argumentum ad Verecundiam- Appeal to an illegitimate authority
- Types:
- Not an expert in the subject
- Not reliable
- The person citing the authority is not reliable
- Non-experts
- Experts in other fields
- Expertise too specified/general for the nature of the question
- Not an expert at all
- Internet sources
- Celebrity appeal
- Personal experience for general conclusions
- Not trustworthy/reliable
- Unreliably biased
- Liars
- Unreliable reporting
- Misunderstanding the expert
- Misquotation
- Reporting bias
- Unnamed experts
- Types: