2. Again, if sacred doctrine proceeded by argument, it would argue either on the ground of authority or on the ground of reason. But to argue from authority would be beneath its dignity, since “authority is the weakest kind of proof,” as Boethius says (Topica 6), and to argue by reason would be unworthy of its end, since “faith has no merit when human reason proves it by test,” as Gregory says (Hom. in Evang. 26). It follows that sacred doctrine does not proceed by argument.
I think that Thomas Aquinas would have had the same opinion about the New Atheists that I do- that when arguing online, they often accuse the Catholic of Appeal to Authority, insisting that this is a logical fallacy because it's on a list at Changingminds.org (or some other such nonsense, doesn't matter whose list it is on).
4 comments:
Appeal to authority is a common method used in confidence tricks, where the confidence trickster sets themself up as an authority and so both dissuades the target from asking questions and encourages them to trust their 'expert' judgement.
Isn't that exactly what the Church does?
It's also what most atheists do.
Is it right for either side to resort to this trick?
There is no other form of human knowledge, than appeal to authority.
Post a Comment