Have you ever heard what an authority argument is? Maybe you have, but you didn't know what exactly it was. Next we are going to explain what an authority argument is so that you can recognize it the next time you are before one of them.
The argument
In a nutshell, the point of an argument is to persuade the reader that your claim has merit. This can be accomplished by empirical evidence in an attempt to convince the reader that the claim is verifiably true. Alternatively, an argument can be based on accepted principles and the use of logic to convince the reader that the claim must be accepted.
A third way to convince the reader is relying on an authority to support the claim. This can take the form of relying on an expert opinion to add weight to your claim, or it can rely on an authoritative source for information.
A good example of the argument from authority can be found in legal argumentation. Attorneys can rely on the authority of law based on statutes or court decisions and statements made by judges in the course of deciding cases.
In England, for example, judicial decisions have authority through the doctrine of precedent. This means that a decision made by the Supreme Court (formerly the House of Lords) it is considered an authorized source of law and can be relied upon later when making claims about the law.
Continuing the example of the law, a judge can issue an obiter dictum that has less authority than a legal decision and supporting reasoning (ratio decidendi). It can still be used in an argument from authority, but it is not as persuasive to support a claim as a decisive reason.
The same judge can also make a statement outside of court. Again, this can be used as part of an argument from authority, but it carries even less persuasive weight than an obiter or relationship.
What this illustrates is that the strength of an authority argument depends on the weight of the authority. The more authoritative the source, the more persuasive the argument. This applies not only to the legal argument, but to any argument that relies on authority rather than logical or empirical evidence in support of the claim.
To conclude this point, a claim may be supported by reliance on the authority, which includes experts as authoritative sources of opinion. Importantly, the strength of such an argument will depend on the weight of authority.
Always try to use the most authoritative source available and, where possible, back up your argument with empirical and logical evidence. In this way you will always have truthfulness in your arguments.
Fallacies and arguments from authority
A formal fallacy in which it is argued that because a perceived authority figure (or figures) believes that a proposition (relevant to their authority) is true, that proposition must be true. This is also known as an appeal to authority or argument from authority (as we have explained in previous paragraphs).
This fallacy occurs when person Y claims that person X has experience in the subject at hand. Therefore, anyone that X believes is the truth. Alternatively, this can also occur if person Y claims to be the authority, therefore anyone who Y believes is true.
This fallacy can be difficult to avoid because we generally have good reason to believe authority or expert figures. Frequently, authorities make precise claims. However, it is important to realize that the validity of an argument has nothing to do with the person making the claim.
Arguments must be based on evidence. However, there are times when the use of authority is not fallacious. Parents often use their authority to convince children to behave. The classic answer, "because I said so", to questions that a child makes, in some way, an argument from authority. Does this mean that the parents are doing something wrong? Do we need parents to show their children that putting their fingers in an electrical outlet is dangerous? No, using authority in situations like this is guaranteed. When talking about science, however, the following must be kept in mind.
Logical form
If a person is an authority on a topic, their claims on that topic are true.
The authority, A, asserts that proposition P is true.
P is within the subject on which A is an authority.
Therefore, P is true.
Examples of argument from authority
- The following abbreviations are used in the examples below:
- PN = The nth premise for N = 1,2,3,…. (eg, P1 is the first premise, P2 is the second premise, etc.)
- C = Conclusion
Examples with premises
- Q1: Albert Einstein was an expert physicist.
- P2: He came up with the theory of relativity.
- C: Therefore, the theory of relativity is true.
Explanation: While Einstein was indeed an expert physicist, winning a Nobel for his work on the photoelectric effect, we shouldn't believe something just because he said it's true. There are reasons to believe that Einstein was right: his theory explains the orbit of Mercury, the operation of GPS systems, and gravitational waves have been observed [1, 2, 3]. All of these reasons validate support for relativity without relying on Einstein's authority.
It is important to be able to recognize when someone uses authority as the premise of an argument. The reliability of an authority may provide reasonable reasons to believe the claims, but should not be viewed as a fully formed valid argument.
Statements made by authorities should be used as a means to focus our attention while we do our own investigation, as they can help us pinpoint relevant data. Arguments in which the conclusion is based on the claims of an authority are invalid and must be rejected, which also includes your own arguments. If you are interested in the philosophy of critical thinkingIt is imperative that you scrutinize your own arguments as thoroughly as you would an opposing argument.