Two Parts

Appeals to Authority

It would be nearly impossible to discover all truth for ourselves; therefore, it is necessary frequently to learn from others. To do so we have to learn which sources to trust. Appealing to authority is saying something is true because an authority says so.

Despite the fact that many make fun of appeals to authority (by asking if you would jump off a bridge if the authority told you so), they actually can supply very good arguments. They are also necessary in real life, as it would be nearly impossible to learn almost anything without them.  Even in the hard sciences, one could not learn without trusting the claims from the textbook, the instructors, or of researchers in the field. The trick is being able to tell which appeals to authority are worth trusting. Here are some good questions to ask:

1. Is this the kind of question that can be settled by an appeal to authority (e.g. an objective matter that is testable)?

2. Is the person cited a genuine authority on the topic?

3. Do experts on the topic tend to agree about this question?

4. Can the authority be trusted to be honest in this context? (There will be a discussion of ulterior motives andinterested parties later on in this guidance.)

5. Has the authority been interpreted correctly? (Sometimes, especially when it comes to sources like the bible or the constitution, this is the most important question.)

An appeal to authority that violates some of the above can commit the fallacy of appeal to inadequate authority.

Here are two strong ones: “My physics textbook teaches that e = mc2, so it probably is correct.” “The civil war started in 1861; my history professor said so.”

Here are two weak ones: “That toothpaste is the best; the commercial said that 9 out of 10 dentists surveyed recommended it.” “The president is evil; I read all about it on some guy’s blog.” Here are some more examples of appeals to authority. How strong would you classify each of them as (and why)?

Though many appeals to authority are strong, often appeals to authority are problematic due to the use of non-neutral sources. Often people are non-neutral due to some kind of interest in the outcome of the discussion. Interested parties are people whose views are probably not neutral because they have a stake in the matter. In logic, we strive to seek to reflect more objective points of view; people who push only one side of controversial issues are people that have an agenda rather than an objective point of view.