Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Science is based on a logical fallacy - II (re: Appeal to Authority)
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 5 of 30 (448287)
01-12-2008 9:11 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by subbie
01-12-2008 6:32 PM


I can't stand it anymore.
Subbie, seriously...
Informal fallacies are only fallacies when they are. Appeal to authority ain't always a fallacy. Neither is any other fallacy. Let me give you an example.
Horses are pretty fast animal.
Unicorns are pretty fast animal.
The first statement is perfectly fine. The second has a problem. Can anyone spell out the existencial fallacy? Here is another, and my favorite.
A: The most powerful bomb in the world must exist.
B: The hydrogen bomb is the most powerful bomb in the world.
Conclusion: The hydrogen bomb must exist.
Let's look at another version of this line of thought... sort of.
A: The most powerful bomb in the universe must exist.
B: The cobalt bomb is the most powerful bomb in the universe.
Conclusion: The cobalt bomb must exist.
Here is my favorite variation of this.
A: The most powerful and awesome being in the universe must exist.
B: God is the most powerful and awesome being in the universe.
Conclusion: God must exist.
Logic is a funny thing. Especially informal logic, you can't just look at a statement, determine if it's valid or not, and pass a judgement on it. Every individual statement has to be analysed statement by statement. Now, let's look at the specific fallacy that you claim science violates. Or better, let's look at other statements that use appeal to authority.
My mother has heart disease so she takes like 20 different heart medication each day. What does each one do? I don't know and neither does she.
A few months ago my aunt had spinal surgery. What exactly did the surgeons do that made her better? I don't think anyone in the family could actually spell it out.
Now, does my mother have to go to med school before she can take her heart medication? Should my aunt have gone to med school before she could have her surgery? Instead of going through all of that, they just did what the rest of us should do, trust our doctors.
Evolutionary scientists are specialists just like surgeons and cardiologists. All these people have gone through at least a decade of school and several decades more of experiences and experimentations, not to mention the thousands and thousands of man-hours they spent thinking about their fields of expertise.
Appeal to authority is not always a fallacy. You have to look at each individual case to see if it's a fallacy or not.
Edited by Taz, : Less paragraphs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by subbie, posted 01-12-2008 6:32 PM subbie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by nwr, posted 01-12-2008 9:28 PM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 7 of 30 (448293)
01-12-2008 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by nwr
01-12-2008 9:28 PM


Re: I can't stand it anymore.
nwr writes:
I think you are making a poor argument there.
I beg to differ.
Your argument should be that a conclusion can be true, even though the argument given was fallacious.
I beg to differ.
Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.
It's only a fallacy when it is.
The result of an appeal to authority might well be correct. But you did not reach that result using logic. You might have good reason th accept authority in this particular case. But your decision to accept authority is outside of logic.
I beg to differ.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by nwr, posted 01-12-2008 9:28 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 01-12-2008 10:10 PM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 9 of 30 (448312)
01-12-2008 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by RAZD
01-12-2008 10:10 PM


Re: I can't stand it anymore.
Either I was taught differently or that I got the wrong impression from my logic professors. A quick google search showed results from both camps.
For now, I'm going to hold out on making a decision on this until I'm convinced either way, although I'm more than willing to concede to your point.
Perhaps they should reevaluate those A's they gave me in my philosophy and logic classes back in college

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 01-12-2008 10:10 PM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by subbie, posted 01-12-2008 11:23 PM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 21 of 30 (449429)
01-17-2008 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by nwr
01-12-2008 9:28 PM


Re: I can't stand it anymore.
This is a reply to all of you, not just nwr.
After you guys made me doubt myself about informal fallacies, I decided to seek out an old aquaintance of mine who by pure coincidence happens to teach logic and philosophy of science at a university. After I kidnapped him and did some torture, he finally agreed with me. Since he couldn't stand the pain, he graciously let me borrowed one of his books on fallacies. I will type out the section about appeal to authority so you guys can judge it yourself.
Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life
By Howard Kahane and Nancy Cavender
1. Appeal To Authority
One of the most serious errors in reasoning is to accept the word of someone, in particular an alleged authority, when we should be suspicious. We all have to appeal to experts for information or advice--only fools don't do so with some regularity. In this technological age we all are nonexperts in most fields. Accepting the word of an authority, alleged or genuine, when we shouldn't makes us guilty of the fallacy called appeal to authority.
But which appeals are proper and which fallacious (hint hint). Clearly, it isn't a good idea to believe that an authority is reliable without having good reason for doing so. Some alleged authorities don't have the expertise they claim; others can't be relied on to tell it to us straight rather than feed us something more self-serving. Anyway, in some cases we need to do some of our own thinking and research.
So when seeking expert advice, three basic questions need to be addressed if we want to avoid committing the fallacy of appeal to authority:
1. IS the source likely to have the information or good judgment we need?
2. If so, can we trust the authority to tell it to us straight?
3. Do we have the time, desire, and ability to reason the matter out for ourselves (or to understand the expert's reasoning, so that we don't have to rely merely on the authority's word)?
We usually know right away whether we have the needed time and inclination, but the other questions often are rather difficult to answer. However, a few rules of thumb should prove helpful.
Some Authorities Are More Trust Sorthy than Others
INdividuals who are regarded as authorities or experts are not created equal. Some are smart, others stupid; some are well trained in their field, some not; some are more or less honest (a completely honest person being a rarity in any case), others pretty much untrustworthy.
Characters who are less than completely ethical are found in every profession, but some fields attract this type more than others. The fields of law, financial advising, and politics, for instance, notoriously attract sharp operators, but even the ministry is not without its Elmer Gantrys and Jim Bakkers, and doctors who prescribe unneeded surgery are not unknown in the history of medicine.
Blah blah blah...
Authorities in One Field Aren't Necessarily Experts in Another
Famous athletes and movie stars who endorse all sorts of products in television commercials are good examples of professionals speaking outside their fields of expertise. There's no reason to suppose that someone who knows how to act, or to hit home runs, knows any more about washing machines, or shaving cream, than anyone else. Blah blah blah...
Learn How Best to Appeal to Authorities
It generally is easy to know which sorts of experts to appeal to. Sick people need to consult doctors; someone sued for divorce, a lawyer. It's a lot more difficult to find experts in a particular profession who know their stuff and can be relied on. But even after finding them, we need to become adept at picking their brains. Experts often throw up roadblocks to understanding, especially by overwhelming us with professional lingo. They frequently find it tedious to explain complicated matters to laypeople, and anyway, they may not want to spend the time and effort necessary to do so.
It also is true that laypeople often are unable to follow the complicated reasonings of trained professionals, medical specialists being a case in point. But it usually is possible to get at least a rough idea of what authorities are up to if we are persistent and if we insist that they translate their professional lingo into ordinary discourse. It's hard not to be intimidated by professional jargon or by an authoritarian aura, but it is well worth the effort to resist that sort of intimidation.
blah blah blah...
And it goes on and on.
The point is appeal to authority is not always fallacious. It can be, but not always. Informal fallacies are only fallacies when they are.
You can read about Howard Kahane this NYTimes article.
Nancy Cavender is a retired English/Humanities professor of College of Marin.
Don't argue with me on this. Argue with those 2 who wrote the damn book.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by nwr, posted 01-12-2008 9:28 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by nwr, posted 01-17-2008 10:17 PM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 24 of 30 (449446)
01-17-2008 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by nwr
01-17-2008 10:17 PM


Re: I can't stand it anymore.
I've already kidnapped and tortured a logician. Don't make me kidnap and torture a mathematician like yourself.
But seriously, I can't believe I got hung up on this issue so much that I actually drove an hour out of my way to meet this guy to have a nice long talk with him on informal fallacies. Now you know I'm nuts.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by nwr, posted 01-17-2008 10:17 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by nwr, posted 01-17-2008 10:37 PM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 26 of 30 (449458)
01-17-2008 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by nwr
01-17-2008 10:37 PM


Re: I can't stand it anymore.
nwr writes:
You cited the authority for support, but did not assert that the authority settles the issue.
Well, the issue that I am concern with is whether appeal to authority is always a fallacy or not. Other logicians on here can comment if they want. The aquaintance I talked to assured me that not only is every logician and philosopher he knows and know of agrees that appeal to authority not always a fallacy, it is common sense that appeal to authority is not always a fallacy.
Appealing to authority in science is not fallacious because not only are the results of scientists making the claims are checked over and over but that the results must be repeatable by anyone/everyone else who chooses to investigate. It is not fallacious because we are talking about real experts who have dedicated their entire lives in researching the issue.
Again, is consulting your doctor (who happens to specialize in brain tumor) about that brain tumor you have fallacious?
Anyway, I've already stressed myself too much on this little issue. Time to take my blood pressure medication...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by nwr, posted 01-17-2008 10:37 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by nwr, posted 01-17-2008 10:58 PM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 28 of 30 (449464)
01-17-2008 11:02 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by nwr
01-17-2008 10:58 PM


Re: I can't stand it anymore.
The issue is about whether appeal to authority is always fallacious. The fact remains that the several logic classes I took in college all taught me that not all appeal to authority are fallacious. The fact remains that a logician who teaches logic and philosophy of science at a university told me the same thing. The fact remains that a book written by a prominent logician also says the same thing.
So, do you or do you not agree that appeal to authority is not always a fallacy?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by nwr, posted 01-17-2008 10:58 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by nwr, posted 01-17-2008 11:17 PM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 30 of 30 (449468)
01-17-2008 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by nwr
01-17-2008 11:17 PM


Re: I can't stand it anymore.
nwr post 29 writes:
I'm responsible for keeping the logic straight in my own arguments. I make no claims to be an authority on logic fallacies.
In the unlikely event that I ever wrote a book on logic, it would probably say very little about fallacies. It's the philosophers who make a big deal over fallacies, not the mathematicians.
Anyway, in conclusion, I'd like to go back to something you said earlier.
nwr post 6 writes:
Again, I disagree. Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. The result of an appeal to authority might well be correct. But you did not reach that result using logic. You might have good reason th accept authority in this particular case. But your decision to accept authority is outside of logic.
It looks clear to me that you made a broad statement about logic, not just your own logic.
Anyway, I've wasted enough time on this insignificant trivial thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by nwr, posted 01-17-2008 11:17 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024