You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Epictetus comments on How to debate when authority is questioned, but really not needed? - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: DonaldMcIntyre 23 February 2015 01:44AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (41)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Epictetus 23 February 2015 09:49:05AM 1 point [-]

It's a tactic to undermine your position without bothering to address the argument itself. Sometimes it comes up when the original post reeks of amateur hour or an individual has grown tired of debating self-proclaimed experts who read the Wikipedia page five minutes earlier. It's sometimes possible to get the debate back on track, but for the most part you're dealing with a debate tactic. You can have a meta-debate over whether such authority is necessary, but by that point you're far off course.

A logical debate can only take place when both sides agree and bind themselves by the appropriate rules. Unfortunately, many who debate online are not willing to engage on these terms.