The term is often little more than a way to dismiss the ideas and
arguments of others so that you don't have to consider their ideas and have a conversation with them.
The conservative politician who can listen to members of the other political coalition like Reagan did, and who can learn to respond to
the arguments of the other side (as opposed to just posturing for the amusement of their own side), won't just win over those who currently think of themselves as swing - voters.
It thus leads us to assume that
the arguments of others are insidious, and to avoid engaging in the hard work of trying to understand their arguments or to appreciate them either as rational agents or as human beings.
One is easily dismissed when they can't understand
the argument of the other side and work through the issues from their viewpoint.
The English language arts standards ask students to read closely
the arguments of other writers to study their thinking and use of language.
I am the main analyst here, and I try to avoid believing
the arguments of others when I do my final analysis.
You ARE invoking an appeal to authority argument, yet there are very good reasons to question the authority you cite — namely,
the arguments of other well - credentialed authorities!
They are useful in outlining your arguments or deconstructing
the arguments of others.