Why are you adamant about delineating between appealing to authority and asking for sources?
Because you said people should be willing to argue without asking for sources, and then explained why appealing to authority wasn’t necessary. As if they were the same thing.
If I say Biden grabbed his grandson and aggressively kissed his face repeatedly, and you asked me for a source, I’d send you the video. The video is not an example of authority, it’s a source.
So I’m trying to explain the difference between a source and authority so that you realize how retarded your first comment sounds
Okay okay I see what's wrong. You're being autistic and insisting that I was talking about the concept of sophistry - "appeal to authority", a fallacious argument tactic. I was describing people making appeals to authority figures. You were pointing to the concept described above.
I find it odd that you'd insert that I don't know the difference, try to correct me on an improper use of the term and then continue to explain that you were right all along when, in reality, you were the one that brought up the the concept that points to improper use of logic. It seems you're really arguing with yourself here. I was only talking about appeals to authority, you were talking about "Appeal to Authority", the concept. The difference is paramount here. I see now you're just sperging.
Do carry on.
Holy fuck you’re retarded.
You responded to someone making fun of ASKING FOR A SOURCE with all of the downsides of appealing to authority. NONE of what you said applied to asking for a source, it only applied to appealing to authority (the concept, as you want to describe it). Just because you didn’t know that what you were describing was Appeal to Authority (the concept), doesn’t mean that it isn’t what you were describing. That’s WHY I told you that that’s what you were describing.
This comment chain is ABOUT asking for sources, that’s WHY I mentioned it. I didn’t bring it up, it was already the topic of conversation before you showed up arguing something completely different
I get it... you're bored and want to argue about something. I'm not going to keep doing this with you. You were the one that brought up the logical fallacy. I was talking about asking for sources makes it seem like the conversation can't continue because someone supposedly of merit might have said something that points to that being untrue. You brought up the logical fallacy. Let's put aside the concept for a moment and just take the words at face value and what they mean individually in regular conversation.
Asking for sources in most cases disrupts the flow of conversation. I stated this and explained it already. I then showed a process for showing people how authority figures for given areas aren't relevant to particular discussions and mentioned that someone looking to get past, "sources please!" can do so in the ways I described.
I don't care about your need to be right. You were the only one bringing up Appeal to Authority. I only reluctantly agreed that I was pointing to people who usually do so. That doesn't mean I don't know what it means. It doesn't mean I don't recognize referencing source material and the importance of doing so.
Sperg somewhere else. We're done here.
(post is archived)