3 ms·
Maybe the word "fallacy", is in that case, misleading. The probability that an assertion is true drastically increases if there is a clear consensus among the
by koheripbal 6y ago
Maybe the word "fallacy", is in that case, misleading.
The probability that an assertion is true drastically increases if there is a clear consensus among the subject matter experts in that field.
This is important when certain assertions cannot be personally verified.
For example, I cannot personally verify that Pluto has a moon. ...but I can show people pictures of an object that the experts claim is Pluto's moon, and point to various statements that Pluto has a moon.
The probability that Pluto does not have a moon would require a massive conspiracy, or some unimaginable misunderstanding, that the probability is extremely low.
Is it still a "fallacy" to point to the statements of those scientists?
- froh 6y agoThe point is that some retired professor in microbiology takes a little lamplight making claims about covid, which unfortunately are factually utterly and desperately wrong. Now people refer to him expert in a facebook thread. That's the "appeal to authority" fallacy, which you could call out. Extensive use of fallacies is in the active repertoire of demagogues. That's why it helps to study them, a bit, so you recognize a skunk if you meet it in the wild.
- packetlost 6y agoThis is the correct use of the word "fallacy." The "appeal to authority" fallacy is the belief that because some piece of info comes from someone (it's generally an individual) who is in a position of authority means that it's automatically true. It has nothing to really do with whether the piece of info is accurate or not, and consensus is generally a way to mitigate the issues that arise from this fallacy.