Argument from testimony

The conclusion is cited in the premise, so the argument form is delta (q is A because q is Z): “… (a) is acceptable (A) because … (b) is said by … (Z)”.

The premise contains a reference to a third party, so the argument substance is ‘III’: “… is acceptable because … is said by … (III)”.

The keyword TESTIMONIALLY AUTHORITATIVE describes the relationship between predicates Z and A. The argument lever can thus be formulated as “Being said by … (Z) is TESTIMONIALLY AUTHORITATIVE for being acceptable (A)”.

Source

Other examples

Notes

The argument from expert opinion, argument from testimony, argument from moral authority, and argumentum ad populum are all specific forms of what is traditionally known as the ‘argument from authority’. The first three types involve qualitative authority: epistemic authority (someone with the right knowledge), situational authority (someone in a position to know), and deontic authority (someone with proper moral authority). The argumentum ad populum, however, relies on quantitative authority. In practice, mixed variants can occur, such as when an argument is endorsed by “the majority of economic experts in the country”.