Argumentum Ad Verecundiam

Last updated on: July 26, 2009 at 3:00 am by Henry Karlson

Argumentum Ad Verecundiam 2009-07-26T03:00:11-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

“But the testimony which I have is greater than that of John; for the works which the Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works which I am doing, bear me witness that the Father has sent me. And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen; and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe him whom he has sent. You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me; yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life. I do not receive glory from men. But I know that you have not the love of God within you. I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive. How can you believe, who receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God? Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; it is Moses who accuses you, on whom you set your hope. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?” (John 5:36 – 47).

One of the more interesting debates surrounding Jesus is his claim to authority. Those who dismissed him said that he did not have any witnesses to attest to him, and all he does is make declarations of himself for himself by himself. In a word, they are suggesting that he is making claims which transcend his ability to affirm. And yet to this he says that he does not claim authority for himself: he has been given it in his mission by the Father. Moreover, he declares the Scriptures, from Moses onward, teach about him and proclaim his authority. If his opponents truly had faith in the Scriptures they would trust in him.

One can imagine what would be said to that today: “That’s an argument from authority.” He is claiming an external authority, which can be interpreted in many different ways, as a witness for himself. His claim can therefore be dismissed as fallacious. If he had any argument to make, he would do so. That he does not proves the untrustworthiness of his teachings. The claim is that Jesus’ appeal to authority falls under the “argumentum ad verecundiam” fallacy. And this fallacy is brought up as a way to reject him and his teachings. We find appeals to this fallacy quite common today because we have become contentious and find it difficult to respect people in authority (although, like with many fallacies, the way this is done is ridiculous to the extreme, because the appeal to this fallacy is itself an appeal to authority [the rules of logic] if one followed through with the common interpretation given to this fallacy which suggests no one can rely upon authorities at all).

So what is it that is going wrong here? Why would it be wrong to denounce Jesus by placing this logical fallacy upon him? Why is an appeal to the authority of the principles of logic not fallacious?

It is because not all appeals to authority are in error, because not all the claims of authorities are wrong. To follow this kind of reasoning is to follow this fallacy in a way it is not meant to be used. What it says is that one cannot use one’s placement in a position of authority as a claim that what they say is necessarily correct. Just because one is President of the United States does not mean your claims of Weapons of Mass Destruction being hidden in Iraq is true (as history has shown). Secondarily, it points out that if the speaker is referencing someone other than themselves as an authority, there is a question as to whether or not their interpretive claims of an authority’s words are necessarily what the authority themselves meant: it is easy to take words out of context and make a source mean the exact opposite of their intent. So one must always be careful about the way one references the words of others.

But there are legitimate reasons to appeal to authority: those who have mastered a subject are more likely to understand its intricate details and provide an accurate description of it, while those who are unfamiliar with a subject, are more likely to misrepresent it if they tried to explain it to others. Being such an authority does lend credibility but not proof for one’s words, and quoting such an authority should at least give people something to discuss and reflect upon. Thus, while a recognizable authority does not prove a statement is fact, it does provide evidence for it. And in the passage quoted above, Jesus’ interlocutors asked for witnesses of his authority, that is, evidence for his claim to authority. An appeal to authority is fallacious only when all questions, all opposition, are dismissed just because an authority has spoken. Pragmatic prudence demands that in our daily life we must accept some sort of authority if we want to live in the world and act in it. We can’t investigate everything, we can’t question everything we hear; we are always acting, making decisions, and those decisions are based not upon infallible knowledge, but on practical wisdom. Practical wisdom is the application of what we have learned about the world from our experiences (and this leads to the authority of our senses), what we have abstracted from our experience (and the authority of intellectual speculation), and what we have learned from others (through their experiences and intellectual activity).

When people hold an authority in common, it is also appropriate to reference it and what it has to say on a subject. Thus, both Jesus and his opponents agree with the authority of Moses (and most will accept the authority of the prophets and wisdom literature of Scripture as well, but not all). In this context, therefore, it was right for Jesus to put it forward as a witness in their debate (although, of course, the application of the Scripture might still have to be explained and dealt with). It is also within this context that the rules of logic, when commonly accepted, do not become appeals to authority when used in a debate.

There is, however, a question which needs to be examined. How does one go about discerning which authorities to accept and which to reject? Buddhist logicians had to ask themselves this question, because Buddhism was concerned about epistemological questions, and Siddhartha himself said that one should not believe him just because he had said something, but that one should test what he said and decide for themselves whether or not what he said was true. This, it would seem, would be a critical position which would make it difficult to have faith, to trust in any external authority.

So why should one accept what an authority said? The answer Buddhists gave to this is simple. It is appropriate to have faith and trust in someone while still being open to the possibility that one’s faith and trust is in error. The key is to be willing to reject the claims of an authority if evidence comes out which proves the authority wrong. However, one can not always test all the claims of a given authority. So what one is to do is find whether or not one can discern if some of the extraordinary or unusual claims of an authority can be shown to be true; if so, then you have a reason to trust their claims, even those you have not yet proven to be true. This is how we normally act. The people we trust are those who have proven themselves to us, not because we have tested everything about them and their claims about themselves, but that those tests we have done have come out positive. Thus, for Buddhists logicians, Siddhartha’s extraordinary claims, claims which transcend what one can normally know, are able to be believed in, because those claims which one can test have proven to be true.

This line of reasoning could be, and should be used, in all kinds of debates, not just religious ones. It is helpful to know what others, those who can be seen as authorities, think on a topic which we know nothing about. And for the most part, is that not what most people are doing when they quote someone? It’s not being suggested that such quotes prove beyond a doubt what is said within it is true; rather it is the suggestion that this is an expert on the subject, and perhaps, just perhaps, because of their expertise, we should at least pay attention and ponder what they have to say. Test their words, by all means; but don’t reject what they have to say merely because we don’t like what they have to say. Often, truth isn’t what we want to hear.

Henry Karlson

Philosophy

Previous Post

July 25, 2009

Tick Tock...

Next Post

July 26, 2009 A troubling new pattern?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "Come, follow me, and I will make you fishers of men"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

John the Baptist Peter Paul Jesus