History Main / AppealToAuthority

** The ol' lab coat routine. Lap coats are appropriate if you are in a clinical setting or worried about contaminating your clothing. Donning one out of context is an attempt to look like a scientist or physician.

*** Penn and Teller's show {{Bullshit}} did an episode on multilevel marketing. A proprietary drink was marketed with Dr. Chopra's name getting dropped in the pitch. It did not impress the customer, who did not know who Dr. Chopra was.

* [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Salinger#Life_after_ABC Pierre Salinger]] gained much press attention for his claims of conspiracy involving TWA Flight 800. Salinger was President Kennedy's press secretary, a senator, and a journalist - including a stint as an award-winning foreign correspondent - but wasn't particularly an expert on aviation or international terrorism.

* [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Salinger#Life_after_ABC Pierre Salinger]] gained much press attention for his claims of conspiracy involving TWA Flight 800. Salinger was President Kennedy's press secretary, a senator, and later a journalist, but not actually an expert on aviation or international terrorism.

* A product called "Vitamins Of Linus Pauling, Two Times Nobel Prize winner" is marketed. His first Nobel was for Chemistry, on the nature of chemical bonds. That's great, but it has rather little to do with vitamins. His second Nobel is the Peace Prize, which has nothing at all to do with vitamins. His connection with vitamins is that he became rather ...obsessed... with mega-doses of vitamin C in his later years, but that part of his work caused much controversy and his results were unreproducible.

This fallacy name is commonly applied to two similar but ''distinctly different'' fallacies, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Irrelevant Authority. It's more-or-less the opposite of AdHominem.

* On ''[[QuiteInteresting QI]]'', when discussing the fact if you fire a bullet parallel to the ground and drop a bullet from the same height at the same time, they will hit the ground at the same time, StephenFry appeals to the audience, saying, "Are there any scientists here who will back me up on this?" Rich Hall then seems to point out this fallacy by following up with, "Or any assassins?"

* [[UminekoNoNakuKoroNi Dlanor A. Knox]] cites Knox's Decalogue several times despite the fact that whether the story is a mystery is disputable in and of itself. She even uses it as basis for ignoring the [[LanguageOfTruth Red Truth]].

* Urban legends site Snopes has a [http://www.snopes.com/lost/lost.asp section]] called [[FunWithAcronyms The Repository Of Lost Legends]], which consists of completely ridiculous stories marked as true and obviously true stories marked false. The "additional information" section for each page links to an essay about why you shouldn't believe a story just because it comes from a seemingly reliable source.

!! [[http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html Appeal To Authority]]:

!Appeal to Authority

This fallacy name is commonly applied to two similar but ''distinctly different'' fallacies, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Irrelevant Authority.

* In RealLife, organizations such as the Discovery Institute provide lists of people who have doubts about evolution as evidence for their position - but they're loaded primarily with people who have prestigious-looking science degrees ''in a different field'', such as physics or engineering. Parodying the use of this fallacy, the National Center for Science Education started [[http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve Project Steve]], a much longer list of scientists (mostly in biology) who support evolution... named Steve.
* In much the same vein, a product called "Vitamins Of Linus Pauling, Two Times Nobel Prize winner" is marketed. His first Nobel was for Chemistry, on the nature of chemical bonds. That's great, but it has rather little to do with vitamins. His second Nobel is the Peace Prize, which has nothing at all to do with vitamins. His connection with vitamins is that he became rather ...obsessed... with mega-doses of vitamin C in his later years, but that part of his work caused much controversy and his results were unreproducible.

It is true for most physical interactions that there is an equal and opposite reaction to an action, but it's not true because Newton said so.

[[http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html Appeal To Authority]]:\\

More accurately called ''Irrelevant Authority'', ''Inappropriate Authority'', or ''Questionable Authority'', Irrelevant Authority is citing someone as an expert even though they are not really an expert on the question under discussion; their expertise is in an unrelated field; their "expertise" is not in a legitimate discipline at all (e.g. an "expert" psychic or ghost hunter); their expertise is ''what'' is under discussion; they have not been demonstrated to actually exist; or they made the statement in a state where their judgment was suspect (ie, they were drunk, high, senile, stressed, angered etc). In some cases they do possess a legitimate expertise and renown in some field, it's just that fields are unrelated to the one being discussed.

* In much the same vein a product called "Vitamins Of Linus Pauling, Two Times Nobel Prize winner" is marketed. His first Nobel, was for Chemistry, on the nature of chemical bonds. That's great, but it has rather little to do with vitamins. His second Nobel is the Peace Prize, which has nothing at all to do with vitamins. His connection with vitamins is that he became rather ...obsessed... with mega-doses of vitamin C in his later years, but that part of his work caused much controversy and his results were unreproducible.

[[AC:{{VisualNovel}}

* In much the same vein a product called "Vitamins Of Linus Pauling, Two Times Nobel Prize winner" is marketed. His first Nobel, was for Chemistry, on the nature of chemical bonds. That's great, but it has rather little to do with vitamins. His second Nobel is the Peace Prize, which has nothing at all to do with vitamins. His connection with vitamins is that he became rather ...obsessed... with mega-doses of vitamin C in his later years, but that part of his work caused much controversy and his results were unreproducible.

It is true for most physical interactions that there is an equal and opposite reaction to every action, but it's not true because Newton said so.

More accurately called ''Irrelevant Authority'', ''Inappropriate Authority'', or ''Questionable Authority'', Irrelevant Authority is citing someone as an expert even though they are not really an expert on the question under discussion; their expertise is not in a legitimate discipline (e.g. an "expert" psychic or ghost hunter); their expertise is ''what'' is under discussion; they have not been demonstrated to actually exist; or they made the claim in a state where their judgment was suspect (ie, they were drunk, high, senile, stressed, angered etc). In some cases they do posess a legitimate expertise and renown in some fields, it's just that fields are unrelated to the one being discussed.

** Which is a parody of cases in real life where "experts" brought in for similar claims just so happen to have come from Christian universities, and be preachers and reverends and such.

* In much the same vein a product called "Vitamins Of Linus Pauling, Two Times Nobel Prize winner" is marketed. First Nobel, at least in Chemistry, dr.Pauling recieved for his famous work on the nature of chemical bonds... which is all good but has rather little to do with vitamins. The second Nobel is Peace Prize, which has nothing at all.
** More research turns up that he did got a little, khm, obsessed with vitamin C in his late years, but that part of his work caused much controversy and basically failed as noone unbiased was able to reproduce results he claimed.

More accurately called ''Irrelevant Authority'', ''Inappropriate Authority'', or ''Questionable Authority'', Irrelevant Authority is citing someone as an expert even though they are not really an expert on the question under discussion; their expertise is not in a legitimate discipline (e.g. an "expert" psychic or ghost hunter); their expertise is ''what'' is under discussion; they have not been demonstrated to actually exist; or they made the claim in a state where their judgment was suspect (ie, they were drunk, high, senile, etc).

----

[[http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html Appeal To Authority]]''':

This fallacy name is commonly applied to two similar but ''distinctly different'' fallacies. Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Irrelevant Authority

A particularly bad variant will attempt to pass off an argument ''based on'' Mister Authority's statements as actually having been made by Mister Authority himself; the standard version being "so you think you're smarter than Mister Authority?" with the answer being "he's not here, I'm talking to ''you''."

[[AC:Truth in Television]]
* A combination of this and Appeal To Popularity (below) is used often used by people talking about however many scientists oppose or support the theory of evolution or climate change, since "experts" with irrelevant qualifications are nevertheless usually happy to offer their opinions on almost any subject they're asked about.
* See also: Any time a parent says "BecauseISaidSo", they're appealing to their own authority rather than providing a detailed explanation of their motive (which they may be uncomfortable actually saying to their child).

* In ''LeftBehind'', the entire world believes a {{Technobabble}} nuclear physics explanation of the Rapture because a ''botanist'' and the ''president of Romania'' (note: not a nuclear scientist) say it's so. Later on in the book, the pseudo-religious explanation of the Rapture is accepted because it's espoused by an ''airline pilot''.

* In one episode of ''{{Dinosaurs}}'', in a trial for the heretical view that the earth is round, the "expert" who testifies that the world is flat's stated qualifications are that he is ''wearing a white lab coat'' and his "proof" that the world is flat is the existence of a flat-earth "globe". If a man in a white lab coat has a flat-earth globe, ''he can't possibly be wrong''. Not just ''one'' flat-earth globe! The company that makes 'em has a whole ''warehouse'' full of the things! What more proof do you need?
* When the ''MassEffect'' sex scene fiasco was at its height, FoxNews had the audacity to bring in an "expert" who not only knew nothing about the game, but wasn't even an expert in her own field

!'''[[http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html Appeal To Authority]]''':

!! Appeal to Authority

The first is the converse of Poisoning the Well, in which it is implied that there is a ''causal relationship'' between who says it and whether it's true or not: --->"Newton said that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, so there is."

!! Irrelevant Authority:

The second form is more accurately called ''Irrelevant Authority'', ''Inappropriate Authority'', or ''Questionable Authority'', and is citing someone as an expert even though they are not really an expert on the question under discussion; their expertise is not in a legitimate discipline (e.g. an "expert" psychic or ghost hunter); their expertise is ''what'' is under discussion; they have not been demonstrated to actually exist (that teacher of yours with a [=PhD=] ain't impressing anyone); or they made the claim in a state where their judgment was suspect (ie, they were drunk, high, senile, etc).

* In ''{{Rain Man}}'', the title character is an autistic savant, and his condition proves to be a major asset in blackjack. Tom Cruise's character, impressed at his ability, then trusts his judgment at roulette, only to find that the advanced mental powers that allow him to count cards do nothing to predict the outcome of a roulette spin.

* Likewise, in one episode of ''{{Dinosaurs}}'', in a trial for the heretical view that the earth is round, the "expert" who testifies that the world is flat's stated qualifications are that he is ''wearing a white lab coat'' and his "proof" that the world is flat is the existence of a flat-earth "globe". If a man in a white lab coat has a flat-earth globe, ''he can't possibly be wrong''. Not just ''one'' flat-earth globe! The company that makes 'em has a whole ''warehouse'' full of the things! What more proof do you need?

* Using this fallacy in real life is also a good way to show that you don't really respect the intelligence of your audience all that much-for example, when the ''MassEffect'' sex scene fiasco was at its height, FoxNews had the audacity to bring in an "expert" who not only knew nothing about the game, but wasn't even an expert in her own field (even before her FoxNews appearance, her books were getting one-star reviews on Amazon and similar for being particularly stupid and useless).

:: The second form is more accurately called ''Irrelevant Authority'', ''Inappropriate Authority'', or ''Questionable Authority'', and is citing someone as an expert even though they are not really an expert on the question under discussion; their expertise is not in a legitimate discipline (e.g. an "expert" psychic or ghost hunter); their expertise is ''what'' is under discussion; they have not been demonstrated to actually exist (that teacher of yours with a [=PhD=] ain't impressing anyone); or they made the claim in a state where their judgment was suspect (ie, they were drunk, high, senile, etc).

:: This fallacy name is commonly applied to two similar but ''distinctly different'' fallacies. Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Irrelevant Authority

:: The first is the converse of Poisoning the Well, in which it is implied that there is a ''causal relationship'' between who says it and whether it's true or not: --->"Newton said that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, so there is."
:::It is true for most physical interactions that there is an equal and opposite reaction to every action, but it's not true because Newton said so.

::While it can be valid to call upon expert opinion to support a position, it is not valid when the status of the person as an expert is the only thing called upon. While the statement may be true, it is not true ''because'' the authority stated it.

::A particularly bad variant will attempt to pass off an argument ''based on'' Mister Authority's statements as actually having been made by Mister Authority himself; the standard version being "so you think you're smarter than Mister Authority?" with the answer being "he's not here, I'm talking to ''you''."

* In ''TheSimpsons'' episode "The Monkey Suit", creationists seeking to ban the teaching of evolution succeed by getting a scientist to testify in court that evolution is a myth -- a scientist with a degree in "Truthology" from "Christian Tech".

* Using this fallacy in real life is also a good way to show that you don't really respect the intelligence of your audience all that much-for example, when the MassEffect sex scene fiasco was at its height, FoxNews had the audacity to bring in an "expert" who not only knew nothing about the game, but wasn't even an expert in her own field (even before her FoxNews appearance, her books were getting one-star reviews on Amazon and similar for being particularly stupid and useless).
* In ''{{Rainman}}'', the title character is an autistic savant, and his condition proves to be a major asset in blackjack. Tom Cruise's character, impressed at his ability, then trusts his judgment at roulette, only to find that the advanced mental powers that allow him to count cards do nothing to predict the outcome of a roulette spin.