EN BG

Appeal to Authority

A Nobel laureate can be wrong. A dropout can be right. Credentials tell you who's talking, not whether they're correct.

Appeal to authority is substituting a person's status for their evidence. "Dr. Smith says it's safe" is not an argument — it's a referral. The question remains: what's the evidence, and does it hold up? A scientist's expertise makes their claims worth investigating, not worth accepting on faith. The moment you stop asking "how do you know?" and start asking "who are you?" you've left science and entered deference.

This gets exploited constantly. Companies put doctors in advertisements. Governments parade credentialed experts to endorse policies. Media outlets quote "a Harvard study" as though the institution's name replaces the need to evaluate the research. Credentials become a shortcut that bypasses your judgment — and that's exactly the point.

History is full of expert consensus that turned out to be wrong. Doctors promoted cigarettes. Nutritionists demonised fat based on flawed research. Economists assured everyone the housing market was stable. In each case, the authorities were sincere, credentialed, and mistaken. The people who challenged them were dismissed precisely because they lacked the same status.

Expertise matters. But expertise is a reason to listen carefully, not a reason to stop thinking. The evidence either stands on its own or it doesn't. No title changes that.

References