> Here's what I wouldn't do: prejudicially dismiss the tribesman's opinion, citing his lack of authority on the topic. Even if you wouldn't in this particular

> Here's what I wouldn't do: prejudicially dismiss the tribesman's opinion, citing his lack of authority on the topic. Even if you wouldn't in this particular case, you can't possibly function in the world if you eschew questions of trust completely. You'd basically have to prove everything yourself. > Even if we accept the premises of an appeal to authority... An appeal to authority is claiming something is true because an authority said it. The inverse of that would be that something is untrue because no authority said it. No one is claiming that to be the case and even if they were, that wouldn't make it an appeal to authority. In any case, this is a question of credibility (i.e., trust). > ...it would follow that one would have to also be an authority on the topic before he could determine the authoritativeness of another speaker. This doesn't follow at all. I am not an expert on tires, but I can understand that someone who has never even seen a tire is also not an expert on tires. > Even if you are an authority, does this status render you infallible? No. Of course not. But it does make you a more credible source of information in your field of expertise.