Liminal
Gold Member
Is it unethical to make arguments based on claims of unsubstantiated expertise? When someone posting on an internet forum declares themselves an undisputed expert to gain some false credibility, aren't they violating some principle of honest debate?
Let's take for example, someone who claims to be an Ornithologist. He claims to have an advanced degree in Ornithology and extensive knowledge of all kinds of birds. He often uses this supposed knowledge to dispute the science of global climate change, claiming his education in a related field of natural science makes him the final arbiter of all such discussions. The problem is, all he seems to know about birds is that they have feathers and they can fly and sing.
Is there any such thing as an honest argument based on anonymous credentials?
Let's take for example, someone who claims to be an Ornithologist. He claims to have an advanced degree in Ornithology and extensive knowledge of all kinds of birds. He often uses this supposed knowledge to dispute the science of global climate change, claiming his education in a related field of natural science makes him the final arbiter of all such discussions. The problem is, all he seems to know about birds is that they have feathers and they can fly and sing.
Is there any such thing as an honest argument based on anonymous credentials?