> No. An appeal to authority is always fallacious. Says who? ;) > Your heuristic may be useful, but it is just that - a heuristic, not an argument. Indeed, b

> No. An appeal to authority is always fallacious. Says who? ;) > Your heuristic may be useful, but it is just that - a heuristic, not an argument. Indeed, but in many but the most trivial cases (stuff like newtonian physics, or computer science, where most arguments are easily falsifiable) heuristics is all we have. Just look at the set of comments we are currently part of, e.g. many of the p-value posts, or the criticism of the small sample size. Those are valid arguments, but also wrong. But how can someone not trained in empirical science find out? Relying on an authority (relevant to the topic at hand) is a valid way to be wrong less often. To put it pointedly: How do you know its always fallacious? Have you actually proved it yourself, or is this from a textbook/the internet, e.g. - from an authority? ;)