Arguments a reader empathizes with have to do with what their personal opinions and ties follow and I am no different. When an argument can tie into my beliefs and current understandings that's when I get interested.
Now when the author's credibility is concerned I do usually look to see maybe why they are interested in the topic and how experienced or qualified they are on the subject. These kinds of things can help me gauge how far I should trust what they are arguing and how serious I should take them. As with all things you need to take it with a grain of salt and never be to trusting otherwise you can find yourself being mislead. There is although a certain line were facts are facts and the credibility of who said them doesn't play a huge factor in the argument. I will read something that is very well supported and end up not having to look up who the author really was for me to see that side of the argument. I will often give the author's logic more sway than what their past was. The cold, hard facts of logic are hard to dispute when they are set up in a very persuasive way.
Take the Book of Mormon for instance. If you look at Joseph Smith's credentials and background experience in writing ancient texts he doesn't seem very qualified. Though there are some very persuasive facts and logic behind the Book of Mormon being a real text and not completely fabricated. Now this doesn't happen all the time but sometimes you can't always judge a book by its author though most often it is a good indicator. So I'm not saying to totally disregard the author but sometimes it might be good to look plainly at the argument without any inhibitions or reservations due to the author.
No comments:
Post a Comment