As appeals to expert authority shift from “fallacies” to “argument schemes,” argumentation theorists are called on to provide critical questions for assessing them. I argue that current treatments focus too heavily on assessing expertise, and not enough on judging trustworthiness. I propose instead a norma-tive pragmatic account of the rational force of the appeal to expert authority, one that emphasizes the ex-pert\u27s actions in constructing his/her own legitimate trustworthiness
The quality of our public discourse – think of the climate change debate for instance – is never ver...
According to a recent account of epistemic authority proposed by Linda Zagzebski (2012), it is ratio...
In this paper, I argue that many arguments from expert opinion are strong arguments. Therefore, in m...
As appeals to expert authority shift from “fallacies” to “argument schemes,” argumentation theorists...
According to an everyday concept of \u27argumentation\u27 the presence of authority rules out the po...
Under what conditions is it legitimate to accept some claim on the basis of authority—in particular,...
Authority is both a pragmatic condition of much public discourse and a form of argumentative appeal ...
ABSTRACT: This article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of arguments based on appeals to exper...
In this paper, an argumentation scheme for argument from an administrative authority is formulated a...
Appeals to authority have a long tradition in the history of argumentation theory. During the Middle...
In academic contexts the appeal to authority is a quite common but seldom tested argument, either be...
In our highly complex world, we confront fields of knowledge in which we must depend upon others wit...
Typically, expert judgments are regarded by laypeople as highly trustworthy. However, expert asserti...
In this contribution, I will develop a comprehensive tool for the reconstruction and evaluation of a...
Expert-informed public policy often depends on a certain level of public trust in the relevant exper...
The quality of our public discourse – think of the climate change debate for instance – is never ver...
According to a recent account of epistemic authority proposed by Linda Zagzebski (2012), it is ratio...
In this paper, I argue that many arguments from expert opinion are strong arguments. Therefore, in m...
As appeals to expert authority shift from “fallacies” to “argument schemes,” argumentation theorists...
According to an everyday concept of \u27argumentation\u27 the presence of authority rules out the po...
Under what conditions is it legitimate to accept some claim on the basis of authority—in particular,...
Authority is both a pragmatic condition of much public discourse and a form of argumentative appeal ...
ABSTRACT: This article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of arguments based on appeals to exper...
In this paper, an argumentation scheme for argument from an administrative authority is formulated a...
Appeals to authority have a long tradition in the history of argumentation theory. During the Middle...
In academic contexts the appeal to authority is a quite common but seldom tested argument, either be...
In our highly complex world, we confront fields of knowledge in which we must depend upon others wit...
Typically, expert judgments are regarded by laypeople as highly trustworthy. However, expert asserti...
In this contribution, I will develop a comprehensive tool for the reconstruction and evaluation of a...
Expert-informed public policy often depends on a certain level of public trust in the relevant exper...
The quality of our public discourse – think of the climate change debate for instance – is never ver...
According to a recent account of epistemic authority proposed by Linda Zagzebski (2012), it is ratio...
In this paper, I argue that many arguments from expert opinion are strong arguments. Therefore, in m...