3 ms·
> that's an argument from authority rather than one of science though. No. An appeal to authority would be "this must be true because someone authoritative sa
by peteretep 8y ago
> that's an argument from authority rather than one of science though.
No. An appeal to authority would be "this must be true because someone authoritative said it". Saying "I am willing to treat this claim more credibly than other claims because the source is credible" is not a logical fallacy.
- arghwhat 8y agoAssigning any credibility to a statement based on the identity of its source is indeed the logical fallacy known as "appeal to authority". Whether you say "it must be true", or "it is likely to be true" does not matter. Credibility must only come from the statement itself and the evidence to support it. However, while it is a logical fallacy, it is reasonable to temporarily hold beliefs for or against the truthfulness of a statement while no or insufficient evidence is present. As long as belief is not mistaken for proof, nothing is wrong about having such gut-feeling.
- mikeash 8y agoThere’s nothing fallacious about assigning greater probability to a claim made by a relevant authority. Such claims are actually more likely to be true.
- peteretep 8y ago> Assigning any credibility to a statement based on the identity of its source is indeed the logical fallacy known as "appeal to authority" I think you are confusing deductive and inductive reasoning.
- o10449366 8y agoIt's a Hacker News favorite to point out logical fallacies in comments as if that automatically refutes them.
- theprotocol 8y ago>"I am willing to treat this claim more credibly" That's a personal heuristic - a very reasonable one, but it's still an argument from authority.
- betenoire 8y agoA heuristic is a bias, not a fallacy. "All else equal, I'll try this path first". A fallacy assumes a cogent argument is being made. This is just a preference.