Changes

More specifically, it refers to citing a recognized authority for something in which they have no special expertise, using the fact that they are knowledgeable about one field to create the impression they are knowledgeable about all fields. For instance, citing [[Robert Bork]] on Constitutional Law is perfectly reasonable. However, citing Robert Bork on the best way to repair a broken automobile is a logical fallacy, because Bork presumably knows no more about car engines than the average American.

More specifically, it refers to citing a recognized authority for something in which they have no special expertise, using the fact that they are knowledgeable about one field to create the impression they are knowledgeable about all fields. For instance, citing [[Robert Bork]] on Constitutional Law is perfectly reasonable. However, citing Robert Bork on the best way to repair a broken automobile is a logical fallacy, because Bork presumably knows no more about car engines than the average American.

[[Liberal|Liberals]] regularly use this fallacy by, for instance, citing [[Albert Gore]], who has no scientific training, as an expert on [[global warming]].

[[Liberal|Liberals]] regularly use this fallacy by, for instance, citing [[Albert Gore]], who has no scientific training, as an expert on [[global warming]].  More generally, liberals often assume that any book espousing a liberal position is automatically authoritative and unquestionable.

[[Category:Logical Fallacies]]

[[Category:Logical Fallacies]]