I always thought that it meant: just because someone has authority over one subject, doesn’t mean they have it for another. Just because Einstein is good at math and physics doesn’t mean his quotes about philosophy and religion hold any authority.
No, it is just about the authority being used as the proof. It can be someone who is an expert on the subject (or not). See the example used in the Wikipedia article:
One example of the use of the appeal to authority in science dates to 1923,[31] when leading American zoologist Theophilus Painter declared, based on poor data and conflicting observations he had made,[32][33] that humans had 24 pairs of chromosomes. From the 1920s until 1956,[34] scientists propagated this “fact” based on Painter’s authority,[35][36][33] despite subsequent counts totaling the correct number of 23.
Einstein is an expert at math and physics but him being an expert doesn’t make something true in itself and we shouldn’t trust the claims etc. just because of his status. But if he makes a claim, it for sure has more merit than claim from someone not as authoritative on the subject.
I always thought that it meant: just because someone has authority over one subject, doesn’t mean they have it for another. Just because Einstein is good at math and physics doesn’t mean his quotes about philosophy and religion hold any authority.
No, it is just about the authority being used as the proof. It can be someone who is an expert on the subject (or not). See the example used in the Wikipedia article:
Einstein is an expert at math and physics but him being an expert doesn’t make something true in itself and we shouldn’t trust the claims etc. just because of his status. But if he makes a claim, it for sure has more merit than claim from someone not as authoritative on the subject.