If someone told you that alchemy must
be a legitimate science because Isaac Newton practiced it, would you
start trying to turn lead into gold?
Of course not. Yet that is exactly how
the argument from authority works – by replacing logic and evidence
with the name of a respected or powerful person.
Whenever your hear such a name used to
back up an argument, you should immediately ask yourself two
questions:
First, is the named person a relevant
expert on the topic? Francis Crick is a legitimate authority on
genetics. Oprah Winfrey is not. If, however, you are discussing media
entrepreneurship, Winfrey's perspective could offer valuable
insights.
Second, does the authority's position
make sense? Although Isaac Newton had reasons to believe alchemy
might be true in his day, the evidence has since led us to abandon
transmutation for modern chemistry. It does not makes sense to
practice alchemy based on Newton's stance on the matter.
The inherent caveat of any
argument from authority is this: no matter how high on the totem pole
a person may be, no matter how much expertise on a subject he or she
may have, it is always possible to make mistakes. Even the brightest
of us is still only human.
Whenever someone flashes a
big name to boost an argument, always be suspicious. Names are only
as good as the ideas behind them.
No comments:
Post a Comment