5 ms·

This is a fallacious appeal to authority. Credentialed economists are not the only people who can make claims about economics. If you can substantively debate h

• tonysdg 8y ago
  Perhaps I misunderstand what you mean, but isn't this the exact opposite of an appeal to authority? The claim is that she's not qualified because she's not a credentialed economist. (I'm not familiar enough with Ms. Warren's background to have a substantiated opinion either way, though I certainly don't doubt her intelligence.)
  • erikpukinskis 8y ago
    It’s an appeal to the authority of the economics establishment. Because Sen. Warren doesn’t teach at one of few named Economics institutions she is not allowed to speak on matters of economics.
    • gizmo686 8y ago
      Nokinside made an appeal to authority when he described Senator Warren's qualifications. BurningFrog is arguing that that is not correct because Senator Warren is not an authority in the first place. You could still argue that she is correct; but (assuming BurningFrog's judgements on her qualifications), that arguement must be on the merits of her arguements, not her qualifications.
      • erikpukinskis 8y ago
        She is qualified to speak on the matter. not as a credentialed economist, but as a legal scholar and a legislator.
• BurningFrog 8y ago
  It seems you didn't read the comment I was responding to? In it, Nokinside claimed that Warren is an expert in Economics due to her academic career. That's what I'm arguing against. I of course agree that people from any background, including Warren's, can make claims about Economics that should be discussed on their merits, not dismissed (or accepted...) because of the speaker's academic background.