Reflexx
New member
No, argument from authority also applies to one claiming to be an expert on the subject matter and thus their opinion should be taken as factually correct.
From Wiki definition:
The argument from authority can take several forms. As a syllogism, the argument has the following basic structure:
A says P about subject matter S.
A should be trusted about subject matter S.
Therefore, P is correct.
Artists says that N-trig sucks.
Artists should be trusted on subject matter related to digital art.
Therefore, Artists are correct to say N-trig sucks.
This is classic argument from authority.
But that's not what most artists here are saying.
A more honest description would be:
Artists says that N-trig has been inferior in the past.
Artists should be trusted on subject matter related to digital art.
Therefore, Artists are correct to say that it's up to N-trig to prove they are better now before we believe them.
We don't claim to feel every level of pressure sensitivity. We claim that when we've tried low pressure sensitive products in the past they were inferior to the current high pressure sensitive products.This is completely false. Again see my musician example regarding music compression or human biology of hearing. Even a person using tools of trade everyday may not know how their tools work. A digital artist may be using their Wacom digitizers everyday, but damn if they know how the actual electronics is calculating the cursor position or the pressure applied is communicated via the driver and API level better than the engineers who made and programmed it, in fact I would bet they won't know anything about it.
Only of subject matter of actual relevance. Just like I wouldn't put much trust a musician to tell me about how human ear evolution works or how signal processing works, I also don't automatically put faith in the artists telling me that they can "feel" the difference in 256 levels vs 1024 levels of very small pressure exerted on a tiny pixel because I know humans are actually very much prone to bias and errors and our senses are easily fooled by all sorts of tricks or even emotional state of mind.
Matters which I would automatically have more trust an artist on? Things such as colour coordination, how to draw anatomically correct human prosture, that sort of thing. But hell I would automatically listen to artists tell me about how they can feel the "wrongs" of electronics (I'm an engineer BTW, but then I would be arguing from authority too)
Because of that, we won't buy in to the claim that this current product is better until it's proven.
And if you actually read the thread you'd see that his position isn't as hard liked as the thread title seems.I don't mind if they are actually skeptical, but that is not what's happening. Go to this forum and look for the thread titled "N-triq over Wacom kills the Pro 3 for me. " Is that someone expressing skepticism? NO. He made the conclusion before having hands-on experience. And there are many of these people in EVERY SINGLE Surface thread all over the internet. We are calling out these people for being unreasonable.
Then take it up with those individuals. Or preface it by saying, "The people who are saying blah blah blah are unreasonable."Again, they are not being skeptical when they flat out declare it DOA simply because it is N-trig.
Maybe I'd be able to think of one more easily if I liked to generalize and paint people into little groups.And what group would we be in?
Why? Because we share similar professions?Again, the few but also extremely vocal ones are giving the reasonable ones a bad image.
You can't fault people for thinking artists are being unreasonable when the reasonable ones refuse to speak out and let the vocal ones speak so loudly and so unreasonably about something they haven't even tried by already pronounced DOA.
Actually, I can fault people for generalizing like that.