- Oct 29, 2017
- 54,687
- 8,038
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Private
This is an awesome presentation, which compiles different experiments in Quantum Physics; as it challenges the way that many see the world.
This is an awesome presentation, which compiles different experiments in Quantum Physics; as it challenges the way that many see the world.
I wish people would stop posting videos without summarizing them.
This is an awesome presentation, which compiles different experiments in Quantum Physics; as it challenges the way that many see the world.
This is an awesome presentation, which compiles different experiments in Quantum Physics; as it challenges the way that many see the world.
New forum rules prohibit that.I wish people would stop posting videos without summarizing them.
I'm a fan of capitalism.
Given that channel is mostly religious apologetics videos, I think it's safe to say that the people making these videos do not have the necessary scientific qualifications to be a valid authority on QM.
It's not that kind of materialism.
It has to do with the nature of the Universe.
You've presented yet another ad hominem fallacy. You seem to have a knack for that. I caught you doing it twice, in what, less than an hour?
Yeah, you believe that there is no single objective view of reality possible, and that QM's description of things that go against what we expect shows that our macroscopic understanding of the universe is flawed.
You seem to be unaware of the fact that our macroscopic understanding of the universe - general relativity - also shows that there is no single subjective viewpoint of reality possible.
If you understood why GR replaced newtonian physics instead of clinging to the idea that newtonian physics was still the best explanation put forward by scientists, perhaps you would know that.
No, I'm pointing out that you are committing the appeal to authority fallacy. Of course, you could show me why the makers of the video actually ARE a valid authority, and I'd be happy to retract my claims.
Is this going to be your standard operating procedure? Throwing out claims I am committing logical fallacies while demonstrating that you don't actually understand how those fallacies work?
Wow! More straw man arguments?
GR served to explain flaws in Newtonian Physics. QM resulted to explain flaws in GR.
Pot meet kettle.
Argument from authority
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
An argument from authority (argumentum ab auctoritate), also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of defeasible[1] argument in which a claimed authority's support is used as evidence for an argument's conclusion. It is well known as a fallacy, though some consider that it is used in a cogent form when all sides of a discussion agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context.[2][3] Other authors consider it a fallacy to cite an authority on the discussed topic as the primary means of supporting an argument.[4]
Contents
Forms
Appeals to authorities
Historically, opinion on the appeal to authority has been divided: it is listed as a valid argument as often as a fallacious argument in various sources,[5] with some holding that it is a strong or at least valid argument[6][7][8][9] and others that it is weak or an outright fallacy.[10][11][4][12][13]
If all parties agree on the reliability of an authority in the given context it forms a valid inductive argument.[2][3]
Use in science
Scientific knowledge is best established by evidence and experiment rather than argued through authority[14][15][16] as authority has no place in science.[15][17][18] Carl Sagan wrote of arguments from authority:
Yes, it's a very nice cut and paste from Wikipedia, but it doesn't explain where I have been guilty of the appeal to authority fallacy.