Cogito ergo sum Logic and rhetoric |
Key articles |
General logic |
Bad logic |
A professor of nothing is a fallacy that occurs when a source is introduced as a "Professor" or "Doctor" or similar (and thus authoritative), yet either they are not a professor or doctor or their field of expertise is not the topic at hand.
The fallacy is an argument from authority and thus a conditional fallacy.
The vast majority of the "positive" reviews of Michael Cremo's Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race are introduced as "Dr."[1] yet are not qualified to speak authoritatively on archaeology.
Young Earth creationist Ian Juby has also occasionally been introduced as "Professor Juby", at least by Carl Baugh,[2] despite not having any semblance of qualification in paleontology (or any other scientific field).[note 1]
Even worse, it is common in some countries for those with merely honorary degrees to refer to themselves as "Dr," often for pure clout.[3]
Simply put, if someone's not an expert in a field, they can't be cited as one.
Every time an "expert" is touted with a title but without their area of expertise, be wary. If the quoter cannot provide the field in question, the source's authority can also be questioned.
Dennis Earl's poem, Professor Nothing, despite implications of conspiracy, covers some of the problems with supposed experts:[4]
Articulation in the highest degree
A familiar presence on my TV
Acceptable presentation for the powers that be
Transparent bullshit for everyone to see
Your expertise is sorely lacking
Yet it doesn’t stop your relentless attacking
Of those who oppose dangerous fracking
And those who support honourable hacking
It's not your place to question and doubt
Your worship of power is completely devout
You hammer dissent with a ferocious shout
As we collectively roll our eyes throughout
You sound real smart but that's an illusion
A professor of nothing bordering on delusion
A willing conspirator acting in collusion
With sinister forces who thrive on confusion