D&D 5E So 5 Intelligence Huh

[pemerton]

What I am calling an appeal to authority is someone claiming something is true because he is an authority. That's a fallacy.

The only fallacy here is your description of what I'm doing.

I reported on the use of a word - irrational - among a community of people who have particular reason to pay attention to its use (namely, academic lawyers and philosophers). You can believe me. You can disbelieve me, for any number of reasons (I'm confused, I'm lying, I'm not a very good academic, etc).

But I'm not committing any fallacy. I'm reporting something I believe to be the case on the basis of my personal experience of it. Just like all those people who tell you that there really is such a place as Skopje.

 

[pemerton]

the dictionary is not an authority in the sense of the fallacy. It doesn't represent a single authorative source. It represents the common meanings of the word as used by millions to billions of people, not one person who says he knows best.

How do you think dictionaries get written? Not by polling millions or billions of people. Contributors and editors survey instances of usage and then form a view as to what a word, as used, means.

Their claim to be able to do this better than you or me is grounded in their claim to the relevant expertise. To the extent that you rely on a dictionary, you are trusting that they have the expertise they profess to have.

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by a single authoritative source, but taking that phrase at face value, it is a pretty good description of what the OED claims to be. (The OED website has the tagline "the definitive record of the English language".)

 

[Maxperson]

The only fallacy here is your description of what I'm doing.

I reported on the use of a word - irrational - among a community of people who have particular reason to pay attention to its use (namely, academic lawyers and philosophers). You can believe me. You can disbelieve me, for any number of reasons (I'm confused, I'm lying, I'm not a very good academic, etc).

But I'm not committing any fallacy. I'm reporting something I believe to be the case on the basis of my personal experience of it. Just like all those people who tell you that there really is such a place as Skopje.

This is what you said.

I suspect I'm the only published academic philosopher and lawyer still posting in this thread. I'm not that interested in a debate over the usage of the term "irrational", but I'm quite comfortable - especially in the context of a relatively informal and methodologically relaxed discussion - in describing as irrational the actions of a person who thwarts his/her own goals and interests because of his/her ignorance and cognitive inadequacies.

You didn't claim a group. You didn't offer up evidence of why the group believes that. You claimed to be a lawyer and philosopher and that's why you were comfortable that you were correct. You based it entirely on your authority, which is an Appeal to Authority.

 

[cmad1977]

And... The INT score of this thread keeps dropping.

 

[BoldItalic]

And... The INT score of this thread keeps dropping.

You're only saying that because it's true.

 

[Manbearcat]

...but in what world is a crocodile or giant boar not more intimidating than a housecat?

THAT IS NO ORDINARY HOUSECAT!

ITS GOT HUGE TEETH...

AND...WELL, IT CAN LEAP....

LOOK AT THE BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONES!

 

[TwoSix]

You didn't claim a group. You didn't offer up evidence of why the group believes that. You claimed to be a lawyer and philosopher and that's why you were comfortable that you were correct. You based it entirely on your authority, which is an Appeal to Authority.

But an appeal to Authority isn't fallacious merely because it's an appeal to authority. It BECOMES fallacious if the authority is making claims on subjects on which he/she is actually not an authority.

Pointing out your own standing as an authority is actually part of making a legitimate argument of authority.

And if you don't trust me, just look it up on Wikipedia. That seems authoritative.

 

[Manbearcat]

But an appeal to Authority isn't fallacious merely because it's an appeal to authority. It BECOMES fallacious if the authority is making claims on subjects on which he/she is actually not an authority.

Pointing out your own standing as an authority is actually part of making a legitimate argument of authority.

And if you don't trust me, just look it up on Wikipedia. That seems authoritative.

On what authority do you presume to speak so authoritatively on authorities?

Are you impersonating an authority?

I'm going to have to notify the authorities.

 

[BoldItalic]

On what authority do you presume to speak so authoritatively on authorities?

Are you impersonating an authority?

I'm going to have to notify the authorities.

He has my authority.

Not only that, but by authorizing him, I have become a de facto authorizing authority, which gives me the authority to authorize myself as an authority on authority.

This is quite useful because now, whatever I say becomes true as a result of me saying it.

Including that.

 

[TwoSix]

He has my authority.

Not only that, but by authorizing him, I have become a de facto authorizing authority, which gives me the authority to authorize myself as an authority on authority.

This is quite useful because now, whatever I say becomes true as a result of me saying it.

Including that.

I have it on good authority that none of you has the authority to question my authority on authorities. Also, poodles.