squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 2 年前rule 📏lemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square56fedilinkarrow-up1362arrow-down10
arrow-up1362arrow-down1imagerule 📏lemmy.blahaj.zonesquirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 2 年前message-square56fedilink
minus-squareRubanski@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up28·2 年前Interesting how it says “authorities” not “experts”
minus-squareBearGun@ttrpg.networklinkfedilinkarrow-up22·2 年前Well it’s likely short for “authorities on the subject”, i.e. experts.
minus-squareRubanski@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up9·2 年前Probably, I just found the change of wording curious
minus-squareℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃@pawb.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up5·2 年前It’s the evolution of the language. One would appeal to an “authority” for an educated opinion. For example the standard fallacy name “faulty appeal to authority,” where information is posed as authoritative but is, in actuality, from a layperson.
Interesting how it says “authorities” not “experts”
Well it’s likely short for “authorities on the subject”, i.e. experts.
Probably, I just found the change of wording curious
It’s the evolution of the language. One would appeal to an “authority” for an educated opinion. For example the standard fallacy name “faulty appeal to authority,” where information is posed as authoritative but is, in actuality, from a layperson.
deleted by creator
Reeeesssspect ma authorotyyyy