Faulty Appeal to Authority
(Discerning the Truth)
The basic structure of this argument is this:
1. Bill believes X.
2. Therefore, X is true.
This fallacy of reasoning is in some way the
opposite of ad hominem. It is the argument that
a claim is true simply because of the person
believing on it or making it.
For example: Jim has a doctorate in theology. It should be true
then if he says that it is OK to believe in evolution and the
Bible.
Faulty Appeal to Authority
(Discerning the Truth)
The person making the claim may be
considered as an expert in relation to the claim.
However, the truthfulness of the claim is not
necessarily relevant to the expertise of the
person making the claim. An expert can not just
over ride the truthfulness of a claim; lest he/she
has a strong evidence to dispute such truth
claims.
When Does Faulty Appeal
to Authority Occurs
Not all appeal to authority are faulty because it is
legitimate to consider the opinion of an expert.
Below are common ways that faulty appeal to
authority occurs:
1. Appealing to an expert in an area that is not
his area of expertise. (scientific data vs historical
evidence)
2. Failure to consider the worldview of the
expert and how this may affect his
interpretation of the data. When we interpret a
scientific and historical evidence, our philosophical
understanding of the universe governs the way we draw
conclusions.
When Does Faulty Appeal
to Authority Occurs
3. Treating a fallible expert as infallible.
Anybody
is capable of committing mistakes even in his/her field of
expertise. Even experts do not know everything.
4. Appeal to the majority.
It is not guaranteed that if a
majority of experts believed a claim to be true that is
considered truthful.
It is commendable to esteem the opinion of experts, but when can
we say that a truth claim is valid without faulty appealing to
authority? Below are some suggested test of truth:
- authority, coherence, consistency (law of non-contradictory),
correspondence (objective reality), pragmatic, revelation, time.