Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:
> No, it makes good sense. This school of logic is thousands of years old > and has been carefully thought out. You should not assume that you know > better than philosophers and logicians. > > > True. > > And that's an appeal to authority, too, by the way... <g> > It is recursive. Another situation in which a properly framed appeal to authority is acceptable, and often used, is in court testimony or in a Congressional Investigation. In a jury trial, it is enough to say that Prof. So-and-so, an expert in thus and such, and therefore his testimony should be admissible. The prof.'s reasons might be too complicated to explain to the jury, so the testimony might include only the reasons (or opinions, really) with no scientific backing, but it is still legitimate. As I said, it is supporting evidence, not proof. - Jed
