What do you think about people....

[OinkBoink]

judging the validity of other people's statements based solely upon their credentials (the argument from authority) ? Many people do it but, ideally, shouldn't an argument be held up or thrown out on the basis of its own merit ?

For example, A is a neurosurgeon, A believes that evolution is false and hence evolution must be false because A is a neurosurgeon.

I think credentials certainly give you some credibility, but not absolute credibility. What do you think ?

 

[zanejohnson]

i agree

 

[GagHalfrunt]

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so my credentials are unimpeachable.

This thread is now about pie.

 

[dighn]

obviously

 

[DrPizza]

Why would a neurosurgeon be an authority on evolution?

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Why would a neurosurgeon be an authority on evolution?

Yea, they have to be smart and all, but lets face it, it's not rocket science.

 

[Phoenix86]

Yea, they have to be smart and all, but lets face it, it's not rocket science.

Heh.

Appealing to authority and speaking from authority are different. After all you do want rocket scientists building rockets.

"I'm a rocket scientist therefore everything I say about rockets is undeniable"
is different than...
"I'm a rocket scientist and XYZ is a good formula to use for rocket fuel".

 

[OinkBoink]

Heh.

Appealing to authority and speaking from authority are different. After all you do want rocket scientists building rockets.

"I'm a rocket scientist therefore everything I say about rockets is undeniable"
is different than...
"I'm a rocket scientist and XYZ is a good formula to use for rocket fuel".

You're right. I was just trying to express the fact that to a lot of people a high enough education in something science based is enough a reason to lend some sort of credence to the statements of these highly educated people even if they aren't on their specific field or even if they are actually untrue .

 

[datalink7]

Heh.

Appealing to authority and speaking from authority are different. After all you do want rocket scientists building rockets.

"I'm a rocket scientist therefore everything I say about rockets is undeniable"
is different than...
"I'm a rocket scientist and XYZ is a good formula to use for rocket fuel".

I was going to say something similar. Yes, every argument should stand on its own merits. However, not everyone can judge what those merits are.

I have zero knowledge about quantum mechanics, so I'm not really in a position to judge any arguments about the science. If, for some reason, I am called upon to make such a judgement I would most likely have to rely upon a specialist in the field.

 

[Rubycon]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2ZtXUEzRFs

 

[rudeguy]

the only answer is to never believe 2nd hand information

I don't believe anything I can't prove or disprove myself. If I can't, I have no opinion.

 

[Greenman]

Yea, they have to be smart and all, but lets face it, it's not rocket science.

I know a rocket scientist, he say's it's not rocket science.

 

[sandorski]

the only answer is to never believe 2nd hand information

I don't believe anything I can't prove or disprove myself. If I can't, I have no opinion.

This is not a practical position to take.

 

[TraumaRN]

I understand as an ER/trauma nurse people take what I say quite seriously if its related to their health. I have found the best practice is to not put myself in a position where I have trouble explaining what I know.

What I mean by that is, if I don't know something I'll say as much, then look it up and report back my finding to the patient. And I certainly don't claim to be an expert on anything.

As a very intelligent professor once told me, if someone tells you they are expert at something, don't immediately believe them, even an expert can be wrong. Have the courage to question them even if it upsets them.

 

[AmdEmAll]

 

[OinkBoink]

I know a rocket scientist, he say's it's not rocket science.

I know a brain surgeon, he says it's not brain surgery.

Okay, that just sounds wrong.

 

[rudeguy]

This is not a practical position to take.

Why not?

 

[sandorski]

Why not?

You use things daily that are too complex for one person to verify all aspects of.

 

[BrightCandle]

The problem on a forum is that the statements are so short its impossible to get a good amount of the argument. No one really wants to write a 10,000 word piece explaining their entire position, including where they agree and disagree and arguing on merit. More to the point many they were arguing with wouldn't read it because it was too long. Those that did read it wouldn't necessarily care how well argued it was because it disagreed with their existing position.

So in essence people try to argue using merit, which doesn't really help either because no one can check such credentials and even if they could it wouldn't change anyone's minds. Any one working in a professional field for a lifetime will tell you they have met a lot of very bad colleagues who don't deserve to be there. So how do you appeal to merit when we don't believe the grand majority of people in a field are pretty average?

Thus IMO the problem eluded to is a function of the communication mechanism used.

 

[Geosurface]

People use authority/credentials or lack of them as a shortcut. People are lazy and don't want to actually tackle the arguments at hand, so if they can find a way to dismiss it or latch onto it... depending on their pre-existing bias toward or away from the proposition... they'll do it.

Ideally, this would not be the case.

Credentials and expertise should carry weight, but often they carry too much.

 

[Gintaras]

Intelligent People - talk about ideas,
Average People - talk about events,
Stupid People - talk about other people......

 

[rudeguy]

You use things daily that are too complex for one person to verify all aspects of.

Such as?

I thought we were using the OP's example.

 

[olds]

No matter their education, if they don't agree with me, they are stupid.

 

[SearchMaster]

Such as?

I thought we were using the OP's example.

If you can personally prove everything you believe, you are either a highly skeptical person or a true Renaissance man. I suspect there is a LOT you believe that you haven't personally proven

BTW, no one has truly proven or disproven evolution and I certainly know you haven't either. There is enough evidence to sway your opinion though.

 

[rudeguy]

If you can personally prove everything you believe, you are either a highly skeptical person or a true Renaissance man. I suspect there is a LOT you believe that you haven't personally proven

BTW, no one has truly proven or disproven evolution and I certainly know you haven't either. There is enough evidence to sway your opinion though.

I'm very sceptical. I don't believe anything. I also ask a lot of questions to help me decide how to believe.