That’s the thing though, It very well can be and often is just a government minister without experience. The Authority in appeal to authority doesn’t dictate whether something is fallacious. Its whether or not utilizing their authority as evidence is logical or not.
The example on Wikipedia isn’t a fallacy because he was an authority/expert. It was that using personal testimony isn’t how you logically determine scientific fact.
I’m not sure what’s happening. You’re repeating what I’ve been saying the whole time, again. What’s going on?
I don’t think you understand there’s a difference between scientific claims and a normal claim. You don’t need to provide empirical evidence to make a normal claim on a social media site that limits characters.
One can rationally assume that a person who has taught classes on Nazi could provide additional sources if asked. Since we can’t ask him questions or haven’t bothered to, at most you could claim hearsay. However, it’s not outside reason to make that claim within the context that social media allows you to respond to rebuttals.
I’m not sure what’s happening. You’re repeating what I’ve been saying the whole time, again. What’s going on?
I don’t think you understand there’s a difference between scientific claims and a normal claim. You don’t need to provide empirical evidence to make a normal claim on a social media site that limits characters.
One can rationally assume that a person who has taught classes on Nazi could provide additional sources if asked. Since we can’t ask him questions or haven’t bothered to, at most you could claim hearsay. However, it’s not outside reason to make that claim within the context that social media allows you to respond to rebuttals.