From: Damien Broderick (d.broderick@english.unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Fri Jul 26 2002 - 21:12:48 MDT
At 07:55 PM 7/26/02 -0700, Lee wrote:
>continued references to
>one's credentials, occupation, or previous experience has the explicit
>effect---or at least appears to show the desire to have the effect---
>of replacing logic and reasoned argument with appeal to authority.
My understanding of this fallacy is that one appeals to *someone else's
inarguable authority*, the notorious examples being: `Aristotle said X, so
shut up' and `Scripture says Y, so shut up or go to hell and burn.'
Adducing your own credentials (where relevant) can usefully guide a
listener's judgement on the likely reliability and robustness of your claims.
Of course it can also get up people's noses, so it might be an ineffective
rhetorical tactic. That doesn't make it illicit as a form of short-hand
evidence. But then I suppose that implies it's a form of profiling... :)
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:41 MST