Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
So 5 Intelligence Huh
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6848372" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I've got no experience of jurors, ignorant or otherwise, and so will leave comment on their susceptibility to poor argument to others.</p><p></p><p>As far as ENworld is concerned, there is in my view a relatively widespread tendency to invoke the notion of "fallacy" when what is really going on is that two posters disagree on how a particular matter should be characterised, or on what reasons bear upon some RPG-related choice, etc. I think it's almost always more productive to actually explain one's view and explain why one thinks another poster is wrong, than to go "meta" and start labelling what are generally sincere attempts at argumentation as fallacy-ridden. (The most egregious example of this on these boards is the tendency to cry "strawman" when what is really going on is that two posters disagree over the salient features and hence implications of some particular subject-matter of discussion.)</p><p></p><p>Maxperson, do you believe there is such a place as Paris? Berlin? Skopje? Sofia? On what basis? I'm assuming you haven't visited all those places to see them for yourself, so you must be relying on the testimony of others.</p><p></p><p>What you are calling <em>the fallacy of appeal to authority</em> is what epistemologists would call <em>testimony</em>. Not all testimony is reliable; but if you don't accept some testimony you're going to end up with a pretty thin knowledge base.</p><p></p><p>I presented testimony as to what is acceptable usage of the word "irrational" among a group of professionals whose daily work includes thinking about the nature of reasons and reasoning. If you think my testimony is unreliable - eg because you don't trust me, or you think I'm lying about my occupation, or you think I'm confused in some way - then that's fine. It's no skin of my nose.</p><p></p><p>But if you think that my testimony is unreliable <em>simply because it's testimony</em> - that's quite odd. How would you have me back it up? Produce more testimony from other academic philosophers and lawyers? But by your own lights, that's just more authority!</p><p></p><p>(I certainly can't prove anything by using a dictionary, because what is a dictionary but a statement by an authority as to what is proper usage!)</p><p></p><p>I don't understand what sort of proof you want.</p><p></p><p>I'm not attacking you. I'm pointing out that your objection to my testimony rests on a principle of evidence - namely, that testimony is unreliable per se - which I am almost certain you don't apply in most other contexts. The reason I am using geographic examples is because they are particularly common instances of people relying upon the testimony of others in forming beliefs about the world. Specialist bodies of knowledge are another such example, which is why I mentioned general relativity.</p><p></p><p>That's not an ad hominem argument. It's diagnosing an inconsistent application of epistemic standards.</p><p></p><p>How would <em>you</em> go about establishing the proper usage of the word "irrational" without either asking those whose occupation involves working with the notion (the dreaded <em>authorities</em>) or looking in a dictionary (another <em>authority</em>)?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6848372, member: 42582"] I've got no experience of jurors, ignorant or otherwise, and so will leave comment on their susceptibility to poor argument to others. As far as ENworld is concerned, there is in my view a relatively widespread tendency to invoke the notion of "fallacy" when what is really going on is that two posters disagree on how a particular matter should be characterised, or on what reasons bear upon some RPG-related choice, etc. I think it's almost always more productive to actually explain one's view and explain why one thinks another poster is wrong, than to go "meta" and start labelling what are generally sincere attempts at argumentation as fallacy-ridden. (The most egregious example of this on these boards is the tendency to cry "strawman" when what is really going on is that two posters disagree over the salient features and hence implications of some particular subject-matter of discussion.) Maxperson, do you believe there is such a place as Paris? Berlin? Skopje? Sofia? On what basis? I'm assuming you haven't visited all those places to see them for yourself, so you must be relying on the testimony of others. What you are calling [I]the fallacy of appeal to authority[/I] is what epistemologists would call [I]testimony[/I]. Not all testimony is reliable; but if you don't accept some testimony you're going to end up with a pretty thin knowledge base. I presented testimony as to what is acceptable usage of the word "irrational" among a group of professionals whose daily work includes thinking about the nature of reasons and reasoning. If you think my testimony is unreliable - eg because you don't trust me, or you think I'm lying about my occupation, or you think I'm confused in some way - then that's fine. It's no skin of my nose. But if you think that my testimony is unreliable [I]simply because it's testimony[/I] - that's quite odd. How would you have me back it up? Produce more testimony from other academic philosophers and lawyers? But by your own lights, that's just more authority! (I certainly can't prove anything by using a dictionary, because what is a dictionary but a statement by an authority as to what is proper usage!) I don't understand what sort of proof you want. I'm not attacking you. I'm pointing out that your objection to my testimony rests on a principle of evidence - namely, that testimony is unreliable per se - which I am almost certain you don't apply in most other contexts. The reason I am using geographic examples is because they are particularly common instances of people relying upon the testimony of others in forming beliefs about the world. Specialist bodies of knowledge are another such example, which is why I mentioned general relativity. That's not an ad hominem argument. It's diagnosing an inconsistent application of epistemic standards. How would [I]you[/I] go about establishing the proper usage of the word "irrational" without either asking those whose occupation involves working with the notion (the dreaded [I]authorities[/I]) or looking in a dictionary (another [I]authority[/I])? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
So 5 Intelligence Huh
Top