Re: hard vs soft evidence; appeal to authority, etc.

[Stefan Jeglinski <jeglin@4PI.COM>]

>  > Thanks to Tim Folkerts and other members of this group for
> >  helping me think more clearly about all this.
>  >    http://www.av8n.com/physics/authority.htm

I have a brief of comment.

Based on the newer thread involving authority started by Joel R, I
realized I misread JD's page, wherein he said he and his colleagues
-designed- a low-noise voltmeter. For some reason, I read this as
"built." My error.

However, below this, JD refers to the design of a low-dissipation
logic gate, and then claims that he and his colleagues constructed it.

In this discussion, where emotions can run high, I suggest an even
more clear exposition, although we know how precise John tries to be
in his wording already. Perhaps "not only designed but also
constructed" would be better. Or perhaps in the left column JD
actually meant to say "construct" instead of "design" [a logic gate]?

If there are citations available to help illustrate these 4 examples,
that would be helpful. JD provided the citation for the voltmeter
design in the later thread, but it does not appear on the web page.

To carry this a bit further, how would I know that any textbooks say
the voltmeter cannot be designed? Here, JD is presumably the
authority that I can trust that this is true. If I happen to pick up
a textbook on the subject, and then another, and neither happens to
say it can't be done, I'm left with the choice of trusting JD as an
authority on this, or looking at every textbook I can find on the
subject until I can confirm it.

I'm not trying to be pedantic - there is a point here somewhere, but
it may be obfuscated by me wondering of I'm just being pedantic.



Stefan Jeglinski