4 ms·

>Saying "this is true because X is trustworthy and Y is an 'evil schmuck'" is not an argument Great! I didnt say that and neither did the gp you originally rep

• EpicEng 7y ago
  >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 you as you seem to have forgotten.
  • kryogen1c 7y ago
    Providing evidence towards the likelihood of truth, as I said, and saying "this is true because X is trustworthy and Y is an 'evil schmuck'", as you said, are not equivalent. Are you actually trying to argue you can't tell the opinion of children and subject matter experts apart because gathering evidence based on reputation is a logical fallacy?