Arguments from authority are typically third-person arguments: X says that p, so p is probably true. Â Saying, I say that p, I have qualifications q, so listen up, is less common. Â When you make an argument as an authority, you still cite reasons, they’re just reasons lay people don’t get.
Now comes Charles Krauthammer, quondam psychiatrist, who offers another twist on the argument from authority: the argument from ceded authority. Â It works like this: I have qualifications q, but I’m not going to invoke them because they would prohibit me from saying p, so I cede this authority, and assert that p. Â Here it isÂ via TPM:
â€œSo I decided when I left psychiatry never to use my authority. But let me just say as a layman, without invoking any expertise, Obama is clearly a narcissist in the non-scientific use of the word,” Krauthammer said during an interview on “The Hugh Hewitt Show.” “He is so self-involved, you see it from his rise.”
I’m pretty sure that expertise is not the kind of thing you can just put aside, as you would if you were a pro tennis player playing an amateur. Â That expertise, once earned, pretty much stays. Â So Krauthammer has offered an interesting variation on the age-old “I’m not a doctor. . . ” it’s “I’m a doctor, but I don’t play one on TV.”