Why Arguments from Expert Opinion are still Weak: A Reply to Seidel

Informal Logic 36 (2):238-252 (2016)
Abstract
In this paper, I reply to Seidel’s objections against my argument from expert performance to the effect that arguments from expert opinion are weak arguments. I clarify what Seidel takes to be unclear points in my argument and show that it withstands Seidel’s objections.
Keywords argument from expert opinion  cognitive authority  epistemic trust  expertise  expert opinion
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.22329/il.v36i2.4670
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Mizrahi and Seidel: Experts in Confusion.Martin David Hinton - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (4):539-554.
On a Razor's Edge: Evaluating Arguments From Expert Opinion.Douglas Walton - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):139-159.
Appeal to Expert Opinion: Arguments From Authority.Douglas Walton - 1997 - Pennsylvania State University Press.
"They Just Don't Get It!" When Family Disagrees with Expert Opinion.A. Ho - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (8):497-501.
The Appeal to Expert Opinion in Contexts of Political Deliberation and the Problem of Group Bias.Lavinia Marin - 2013 - Annals of the University of Bucharest - Philosophy Series 62 (2):91-106.
Added to PP index
2016-06-30

Total downloads
63 ( #85,850 of 2,193,775 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
17 ( #10,615 of 2,193,775 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature