Appeal to Authority
Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy which appeals to authority for the reason/premis of something being true. The fallacy is made by appealing to an incorrect source of authority, when the cause for a conclusion is given. The purpose of the appeal to authority or argument from authority, is to extend one own's knowledge and understanding, by claiming truth over a subject's conclusion, of which is unable to be reached by one's own knowledge and understanding.
Identity:
Person 1: makes a claim "y"
Person 1: justifies that claim "y" by argument from authority "x".
"y" is true because "x" - (said so).
Example #1
It is true that we live in a computer simulation. Elon Musk said it himself!
Example #2
Dude you can not do that! That is against the holy statues will.
Example #3
Diet coke is safe to drink. I read that in the scientific journal.
Example #4
I saw on the news that Iraq have weapons of massdestruction, therefore it must be true. Why would they otherwise be saying it on the news on television.
Example #5
Drugs are illegal for a reason. But not only that my teacher told me that drugs are bad, because drugs are bad.
Illustration:
By supporting the claim "y" simply by adding the premis: 'An authority said so', a fallacy is automatically produced. Appealing to authority in a premis creates an error in logic, due to the source of which validates or invalidates information. By making an argument sound appealing because "x" says so too, has a two fold build in error.
Human beings does not make up reality and does not have the power to turn a wrong into a right or vice versa. What we think, feel, hope, want, wish etc. does not influence what is real or not (in the physical domain). This can easily be tested over and over again, simply by following this easy step by step guide
When appealing to authority and claim something is true because an authority said so, one does not only commit the error of accepting the idea, that a seen authority can generate a truth - But also hidden behind the veil is the prerequisite and therefore necessary conviction that: He who believe in the "seen" authority also deems himself an authority, to point to the chosen one. The "seen" authority.
Premis 1:
When the cause of "y" ("x") is embedded with the following information:
[Because human authority said so]. It is inevitable not to break the law of identity.
Instead of speaking about the natural cause of "y" (the force which caused the effect), the appeal to authority fallacy merely concerns itself with: who said it and what "he" said about it. This is in contrast to give the actual premis(es) for why "y" is true or false.
Illustration:
- 'Clearly you pissed your pants' (the effect, conclusion, how it is).
- 'I know that because your pants are all wet and the snow around your feet, is all yellow' (the cause/premises/the why).
Appealing to authority in this instance could be: 'Because I said so or my daddy told me'.
Premis 2:
Besides extracting the fact that an appeal to authority is concerned with a misidentification of causality, it is also possible to extract that another contradiction, will follow from appealing to an incorrect source of authority over truth. This other extraction is an error in thought, that can be located in the contradictory claim, that truth is generated from human beings, and not caused by reality any longer.
Illustration:
Instead of having truth as first principle, "Man's" truth becomes first principle. This of course conflicts with every testable scenario. In other words, appealing to a human being as the source of truth, is a form of wishful thinknig But on steriods, as the logical consequence of being that which generates truth, is to be God the creator.
Causation:
The target(s) have been tricked into accepting the mental image of what is causing something to be true, by appealing to an authority of which the target(s) deem worthy of such title. This manipulation render the target's mental state open for broken logic that contradicts reality.
Effects(s):
Local:
The appeal has succeded and the target(s) have put down their critical thinking skills on the very topic, accepting that it is true because Einstein (an authority) said so. Had either the person making the claim or the target(s) actually known the true cause, there would be no need for an appeal to Einstein in the first place.
Global:
The global consequence of this fallacy is that it changes the entire way the world is viewed. It is no longer just a particular subject like gravity waves, Einstein knows for us, but every single thing is either validated or invalidated through appeals to authority. This makes the target(s) extreamly receptable to mind control for what should be obvious reasons. Like: Because I said so. :)
Note:
Human beings can very well be correct and tell the truth about something. The appeal to authority fallacy is just concerned with the logical error of producing truth, by using an incorrect source. Some would argue that "real" scientist and experts can be authorities - Which of course, is just another appeal to authority.
Other references:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/21/Appeal-to-Authority