• ysjet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 years ago

    Ehhhh. These are the experts in the field. If they’re chiming in with “Yo this looks sketchy as fuck,” you should consider that, instead of bandwagoning, they’re speaking in their capacity as video game artists with experience and training in the matter.

      • ysjet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 years ago

        Actually, you’re misunderstanding why the Appeal to Authority is a fallacy- Appeal to Authority is one of the few fallacies that has both fallacious and non-fallacious uses. You shouldn’t take AtA being known as a fallacy as a reason to distrust authorities, or do some kind of ‘well I have to do my own, uneducated research on this subject.’ You shouldn’t take it as an automatic fallacy simply because the authority might have biases either. AtA is not an argument for anti-authoritarianism or anti-education.

        The key here is that an appeal to authority is fallacious when it’s stated to support a position that is not related, or the authority is not an authority in the subject.

        For example, if someone said “I’m a game developer, and I think this was stolen,” that could be a fallacious appeal to authority- they might work on sound engines! However, if someone says they’re an 3d modeler/animator and they think the mesh looks stolen because the edgelines for the tris map the same ways within the quads, which is unlikely to happen by accident, that’s a legitimate appeal to authority that is not fallacious. If someone says they’re a lawyer and think it’s stolen, this could be a fallacious appeal to authority- they might not be an IP lawyer.

        They key is ensuring that the appeal to authority is relevant and is not predicated on the idea of being true simply because of who they are.

        And no, ‘There is a theoretical possibility the authority could have had a bias’ is not an acceptable reason to dismiss an expert opinion as a fallacy.

          • ysjet@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 years ago

            I find it rather hilarious that you’re trying to warn me against discourse in the vein of "I assume you’re ignorant, so let me enlighten you’ while literally doing it yourself. You can try to pretend you’re not in #3, but you literally just spent like 8 paragraphs trying to do so. Incorrectly, at that, but since you clearly think you’re so much smarter than all the ignorant “muppets” (as you put it) out there who you’re dismissing as band-wagoners without doing any of your beloved deductive reasoning on the proof they’ve been providing I doubt you’ll actually consider it for a moment.

            Even funnier is the fact that you’re trying to drag out all these debates about the exact definitions and semantics when in the end this only came up because of your own strawman in the first place- that being your own assumption that an appeal to authority was even happening in the first place, when I specifically noted that one should examine what the experts are saying instead of just dismissing them as band-wagoners.

      • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        That’s not the appeal to authority fallacy. What you described is why MAGA refuses to listen to experts re: the Covid vaccine and it’s specious logic at best. It also quickly backslides into “I don’t trust you because you’re an authority.”