How thought shapes action Arguments from Authority & the Protestant Reformation How thought shapes action

6.0 what is an argument from authority? An Argument from Authority is a logical fallacy (or error in logic). The truth of such arguments do not depend upon the merits of the argument itself. Instead, the arguer attaches the truth of their argument to a person of authority in an attempt to make the argument appear more supportable. Example: “Well, Aristotle believed the earth was at the center of the universe. Do you think you know more than Aristotle?”

6.0 are arguments from authority ever valid? Arguments from authority are valid when an “expert” speaks about a topic they have direct and considerable knowledge about, e.g. you would ask a baker on how to make donuts but you would not consider them to be an authority on theoretical physics. Questions to Consider: 1). Is the Catholic Church’s claim that the bread and wine literally become the flesh and blood of Jesus during Communion an example of the logical fallacy of arguing from authority? 2). Or is the Pope an “expert” on religious matters and therefore we should just trust his assertion that the wine becomes the actual blood of Christ?

6.0 why resort to arguments from authority? The ultimate purpose of making any argument is to influence others by convincing them that something is true. Frequently, whether the argument is actually true or not is secondary to the attempt to influence.

6.0 why resort to arguments from authority? The Catholic Church taught doctrines as true like the sale of Indulgences, etc. that were not expressly mentioned in scripture. The Church appealed to its authority to compel people to accept what it taught at face value. A Question to consider: was Martin Luther justified in challenging the Catholic Church’s Doctrine of Indulgences?