3 ms·

Benjamin Franklin is a Founding Father and has been generally accepted as an authority for more than 200 years, especially on the subject of freedoms and rights

Benjamin Franklin is a Founding Father and has been generally accepted as an authority for more than 200 years, especially on the subject of freedoms and rights. He was a renown political theorist, politician, civic activist, statesman, and diplomat in his own day, not to mention the fact his reputation has stood the test of time. William Barr is none of these thing.

EpicEng 7y ago
So... Appeal to authority then?
- noja 7y ago
  Can you call it that though? One is a person with a well-earned a reputation, the other.. well you get the point.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    >Can you call it that though? >One is a person with a well-earned a reputation, the other.. well you get the point. Yes >An argument from authority, also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of defeasible argument in which a claimed authority's support is used as evidence for an argument's conclusion You're not defending the point logically; you're only supporting argument is that someone with a good reputation supports it as well.
    - kryogen1c 7y ago
      > You're not defending the point logically; He absolutely is The annoying thing about "logical fallacies" is that if anyone season argument they disagree with that resembles a "fallacy", that quote it and act like theyve won. He is not saying that everything Benjamin Franklin has ever said is true. Obviously. However, if a well renowned and respected Authority has an opinion that some evil schmuck disagrees with, it provides evidence as to who is more likely to be correct. That's not what an appeal to Authority is
      - EpicEng 7y ago
        >He absolutely is Show me where that happened. >The annoying thing about "logical fallacies" is that if anyone season argument they disagree with that resembles a "fallacy", that quote it and act like theyve won. That is annoying and I agree, but that's not what's going on here. >He is not saying that everything Benjamin Franklin has ever said is true. No one said he was. >However, if a well renowned and respected Authority has an opinion that some evil schmuck disagrees with, it provides evidence as to who is more likely to be correct. No it doesn't. It absolutely _does not_. Reputation isn't irrelevant in so far as it lends credibility to a person's statements, but the discussion doesn't stop there. If you're going to defend a quote then defend it. Saying "this is true because X is trustworthy and Y is an 'evil schmuck'" is not an argument. If this is not a prime example of Appeal to Authority then show me why it's not and provide an example. You're just throwing out your opinions as if they were fact.
        tbirrell 7y ago
        This is not an example of Appeal to Authority because Ben Franklin is an accepted authority. If all parties agree on the reliability of an authority in the given context it becomes a valid inductive argument. Otherwise every Citation or Source or Bibliography would be a "logical fallacy". An Appeal to Authority would be if the quote was attributed to someone like James Polk. Sure he was president, but he has no authority on this sort of subject.
        EpicEng 7y ago
        >This is not an example of Appeal to Authority because Ben Franklin is an accepted authority. ...huh? >If all parties agree on the reliability of an authority in the given context it becomes a valid inductive argument. No, it doesn't. Why do you believe that? How do you feel about quantum mechanics? Do you realize that Einstein fought tooth and nail against it for years? >Otherwise every Citation or Source or Bibliography would be a "logical fallacy". Citations link to works, not authorities. A citation may link to, say, an academic paper which provides evidence to support its assertions. No one is linking to random comments made by so-called authorities, that would never be accepted (unless the citation was to literally show that a quote is legitimate, i.e., made by the person claimed to have made it.)
zknz 7y ago
And yet he owned slaves.
- onetimemanytime 7y ago
  and...? For example, you can be a Nazi and a great mathematician or be a pedophile and a great philosopher....etc etc

EpicEng 7y ago

So... Appeal to authority then?

noja 7y ago
Can you call it that though? One is a person with a well-earned a reputation, the other.. well you get the point.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  >Can you call it that though? >One is a person with a well-earned a reputation, the other.. well you get the point. Yes >An argument from authority, also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of defeasible argument in which a claimed authority's support is used as evidence for an argument's conclusion You're not defending the point logically; you're only supporting argument is that someone with a good reputation supports it as well.
  - kryogen1c 7y ago
    > You're not defending the point logically; He absolutely is The annoying thing about "logical fallacies" is that if anyone season argument they disagree with that resembles a "fallacy", that quote it and act like theyve won. He is not saying that everything Benjamin Franklin has ever said is true. Obviously. However, if a well renowned and respected Authority has an opinion that some evil schmuck disagrees with, it provides evidence as to who is more likely to be correct. That's not what an appeal to Authority is
    - EpicEng 7y ago
      >He absolutely is Show me where that happened. >The annoying thing about "logical fallacies" is that if anyone season argument they disagree with that resembles a "fallacy", that quote it and act like theyve won. That is annoying and I agree, but that's not what's going on here. >He is not saying that everything Benjamin Franklin has ever said is true. No one said he was. >However, if a well renowned and respected Authority has an opinion that some evil schmuck disagrees with, it provides evidence as to who is more likely to be correct. No it doesn't. It absolutely _does not_. Reputation isn't irrelevant in so far as it lends credibility to a person's statements, but the discussion doesn't stop there. If you're going to defend a quote then defend it. Saying "this is true because X is trustworthy and Y is an 'evil schmuck'" is not an argument. If this is not a prime example of Appeal to Authority then show me why it's not and provide an example. You're just throwing out your opinions as if they were fact.
      - tbirrell 7y ago
        This is not an example of Appeal to Authority because Ben Franklin is an accepted authority. If all parties agree on the reliability of an authority in the given context it becomes a valid inductive argument. Otherwise every Citation or Source or Bibliography would be a "logical fallacy". An Appeal to Authority would be if the quote was attributed to someone like James Polk. Sure he was president, but he has no authority on this sort of subject.
        EpicEng 7y ago
        >This is not an example of Appeal to Authority because Ben Franklin is an accepted authority. ...huh? >If all parties agree on the reliability of an authority in the given context it becomes a valid inductive argument. No, it doesn't. Why do you believe that? How do you feel about quantum mechanics? Do you realize that Einstein fought tooth and nail against it for years? >Otherwise every Citation or Source or Bibliography would be a "logical fallacy". Citations link to works, not authorities. A citation may link to, say, an academic paper which provides evidence to support its assertions. No one is linking to random comments made by so-called authorities, that would never be accepted (unless the citation was to literally show that a quote is legitimate, i.e., made by the person claimed to have made it.)

zknz 7y ago

And yet he owned slaves.

onetimemanytime 7y ago
and...? For example, you can be a Nazi and a great mathematician or be a pedophile and a great philosopher....etc etc