Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You are arguing from authority, which is a fallacy. It does not matter who thinks something is obvious nor what labeled group you ascribe those thoughts to.



Argument from authority or appeal to authority aren't fallacies by definition, but only when a premise therein is flawed.

The "rocket scientist" that is responsible for landing the craft previously worked on NASA's SMAP satellite, on the control team. One challenge faced with controlling that satellite was that several systems had to share an antenna for different purposes, and the hardware needed to be steered as part of its scanning duties. Dr. Lars Blackmore (said rocket scientist) has authored many papers on control systems, several of which discuss communications as part of it.

I would submit as my "argument from authority" (appealing to Dr. Blackmore's authority) that this particular rocket scientist is likely to have ruled out the ideas posited by any given armchair quarterback engineer, a role I know many of us like to play. The premises behind the argument are not in danger of being flawed, that I can tell; my conclusion may be, but that would just be an everyday incorrect conclusion and not an outcome from a logical fallacy.


Argument from authority is always a fallacy. Your conclusion may be correct, but it is not because an authority says so.


Commenter wants to know why they are being downvoted and the response to them gets downvoted. Nice.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: