«Why should I trust your opinion anyway, you claim to be more qualified than me to decide what treatment is best but that's
just appeal to authority and I have a PhD myself you know, and you were a bit rude to me when I came in last time and I read that you were fiddling your taxes so how can I trust your professional judgement?
Your claim is not
just appeal to authority, it's repugnant hubris.
Not exact matches
The claim that the UN resolutions suffice
to assure «
just authority» is belied by destruction in Iraq unrelated
to freeing Kuwait (bridges, roads, municipal water and sewage systems) and by restatements of war aims (asking Iraqis
to replace Saddam Hussein, demanding unconditional surrender and a war crimes trial) which go far beyond the UN objective (note as well the elements of bad faith in the UN
appeal to which Geyer pointed).
In an age suspicious of all
authority outside of the self, the
appeal to a word that carries transcendent
authority can be
just distinctive and disruptive enough
to be heard, even if not immediately embraced.
Paul and others will make an
appeal to their
authority as apostles when necessary, or they will say it is a custom, or a hymn; it's not that hard, really, when anyone reads the whole thing instead of
just verses.
My guess is Chad
just threw in Dr. Collins» name in a lame
appeal to authority.
The feeling that somebody has
just passed away whose horizons and global
appeal extended the international significance of this country is omnipresent — as well as the prevailing idea that his death marks an end of one era... Even the other Vaclav in the presidential office, his successor Klaus, who has been Havel's rival and critic ever since 1989, is now giving him credit —
to the degree of admitting that we owe his predecessor «like nobody else for the international position, prestige and
authority of the Czech Republic in the world.»
I have no idea where the CJ would get the
authority not
just to reach down and expedite a pending
appeal but
to order that cases in varying states of disarray (and maybe some have not even been filed yet) resolved at the trial level and the first appellate level and brought up
to the Court of
Appeals, IF the top court even has jurisdiction over each distinct dispute, within a fixed time.
This is especially the case for young people, because alternative health books belong
to a paranoid subculture that naturally
appeals to person
just beginning
to learn that
authority figures can be totally wrong.
Appeals to authority are fine,
just like real courts.
Just because an argument is predicated on an
appeal to authority in conjunction with a «larger» argument» does not make the argument valid.
Going after a widely published climate scientist, no matter what they said about Mann's work, would
just make Mann look bad (I mean, Judith has well over 100 pear reviewed publications, including a bunch in 2013 and 2014, books, etc), and would pretty much eliminate
appeals to authority in front of a jury.
It pays
to remember this when the nonsense about 91 %
to 100 % consensus is thrown around, it is very much
just a peer pressure version of
appeal to authority.
(As propaganda depends on quantity and repetition... The truth
just needs
to be heard by a thinking mind...) So truthful questions and truthful evidence and truthful doubts and truthful counter points are attacked, vilified (usually «attack the messenger»), deleted, and drowned out in a flood of non-sequitur and
appeal to authority arguments... (Another useful tool, btw, is
just to measure the number of Logical Fallacies vs correct logical syllogisms... the more LF the more it's propaganda... the more correct logical syllogisms, data included btw, the less propaganda and the more honest science... but I haven't named that thought tool yet... Perhaps the LF Ratio?
There is no
authority to appeal to, there are
just camps of experts (and knowledgeable non-experts) opposing one another.
In
just 1400 words he manages
to cram in
just about every fallacy from the environmentalist's handbook: he
appeals to the dodgiest of
authorities, sells politics, catastrophism and factoids as scientific truth, misrepresents his opponents» arguments, cherrypicks data, explains human behaviour in biologically deterministic terms and politics in environmentally deterministic ones, and resorts
to the green equivalent of Pascal's wager while accusing «deniers» of religious zeal.
This presentation by Naomi Oreskes is worth watching in full, but at
just past the 14 minute point she deals with the value and significance of consensus in science and the question of the
appeal to authority.
Blocher argues that while this makes sense as a way of allocating decisionmaking
authority between trial and appellate courts based on their relative strengths, he does not see how those arguments apply at all
to instant replay in sports, which he characterizes as «
just appeals of a different kind.»
«Where an employer fire
authority has, at two instances, decided that disciplinary offences should lead to dismissal, good reason is required to overrule their decision, and the Authority is entitled to know why the Secretary of State disagreed with it, just as a fire officer whose appeal is dismissed is entitled to know wh
authority has, at two instances, decided that disciplinary offences should lead
to dismissal, good reason is required
to overrule their decision, and the
Authority is entitled to know why the Secretary of State disagreed with it, just as a fire officer whose appeal is dismissed is entitled to know wh
Authority is entitled
to know why the Secretary of State disagreed with it,
just as a fire officer whose
appeal is dismissed is entitled
to know why.»
The Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2006 (H.R. 4973) increases the borrowing
authority of the National Flood Insurance Program
to $ 25 billion from
just over $ 20 billion and instructs the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which manages the flood insurance program,
to finalize an
appeals process for borrowers whose claims are denied by their carrier.