Roel wrote:I think I get why this is: an outsider can get a better general overview of a situation than a participant.
Say a boss is forced to fire his worker because of outside circumstances. The worker might be convinced that it's all the fault of the boss, while an outsider might see that the boss was subject to certain circumstances and it was outside of his possibilities to keep the worker.
However, when talking about what working feels like, how it is experienced, only the worker will really know.
You're right, this is the point I wanted to emphasize.
BTW, what happens when two workers have different points of view? Two workers work side-by-side on the same production line. They do the same job. Exactly same duties, responsibilities. They start and end at the same time every day, and take vacations when the factory stops for two weeks in the summer. They earn the same wage, and have the same superwisor. Have the same co-workers, and eat every day lunch in the same cafeteria.
How do you explain their differing opinions? If their opinions differ. So let's assume their opinions about aspects of their jobs differ.
I don't mean how this is possible for them to have different opinions. You can create a case mentally really easily of that. I meant from the "weight behind the opinion" point of view.
And if their boss, or any outsider: you or me, or anyone, aligns with the opinion of Worker A, but not with the opinion of Worker B, then will this Outsider A's opinion bear more or less weight than the opinion of Outsider B's opinion, who sides with the opinion of Worker B?
This is the can of worms and the slippery-slope angle of the "assigning of weights to opinions" argument. I may be an outsider, and have less weight, than Worker A or Worker B individually, but I happen to side with Worker A who actually said the truth, and Worker B's opinion is invalid, or does not reflect the truth. In your argument, you give Worker B a higher weight rating than to me, Outsider A, and yet you admit (after hearing the supporting arguments) that I was right and Worker B was wrong.
Despite Worker B having a higher weight-rating for dependability of his opinion than I!
This is why I don't support the weight-ranking of opinions. I think opinions should be measured and judged for their testable truths, rather than relying on who utters what opinion.
And in fact, this is the reason and background for having an "appeal to authority" fallacy.