|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Does Winning a Nobel Prize Support An Argument ?
If so, why?
I would say that it lends that person, or that specific issue, some credibility. They don't give out those prizes to just anyone. But neither is it infallible. All awards are given out by humans and are subject to the same shortcomings we all have.
Even if an argument is not credible, it must have some worth if it is logical, no? An N.P. is just recognized by people. If a more "important argument" makes more sense and is not credited with a N.P. as opposed to one that is, how is that sensible?
A Nobel Prize is not a prerequisite for a logical or important argument. It's just one of many ways we assess those arguments.
Of course it does, it supports this argument, that person is a loon because the reputation of the Noble prize has been seriously damaged by Barack Obama, the surprise winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. The Committee praised what it called his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy".
The American president, in power just 9 months, was chosen over the 204 other people on that year's record length shortlist. That farcical decision of the Nobel committee calls into question not only the validity of all previous awards but the motivation behind making selections which now has been proven to be heavily political and insincere.
Had Obama, now known to be a pathological liar responsible for setting world peace back decades, lived up to the committee's expectations doesn't matter because the award is not supposed to be given solely on the basis of the winner's perceived good intentions. If anything Obama has made "extraordinary efforts to destroy international diplomacy". There set with Russia? How many red lines? Our allies don't trust him, his mishandling of Iraq has set the entire Mideast a flame, the whole world hates him more than they hated Bush,just read the polls.
Frankly if anyone in today's world wants to lend credibility to themselves for the sake of an argument I would think the last thing they'd want to assert is that they won a Nobel Prize! Wouldn't you agree?
It lends about as much support to an argument as saying "I was elected the captain of the football team in high school, really it's just a popularity award. Not just Obama, other award winners have demonstrated the same incompetence in their field, it's a joke.
That depends on the argument. It it's not about what the guy won the prize for, then it's just an Appeal to Improper Authority (Argumentum Ad Verecundium, literally "argument from that which is improper"): An appeal to an improper authority, such as a famous person or a source that may not be reliable. This fallacy attempts to capitalize upon feelings of respect or familiarity with a famous individual. It is not fallacious to refer to an admitted authority if the individual’s expertise is within a strict field of knowledge. On the other hand, to cite Einstein to settle an argument about education or economics is fallacious. To cite Darwin, an authority on biology, on religious matters is fallacious. To cite Rand Paul; an Opthamologist, on the Constitution is fallacious.
That person could undoubtedly use it in an argument but what does it really prove? That their peers saw fit to give them an award? It's like a footballer winning player of the season, yes he can brag about the accolade but it doesn't mean he's technically had the best season, just that his peers have voted for him.
by egiv8 years ago
I can't wait to read about how big of a joke the (Norwegian) Nobel Prize selecting committee is and that since nazi Germany loved Hitler and so many love Obama, it logically makes Obama Hitler.Can you people be proud...
by purnimamoh19825 years ago
Why there is no Nobel Prize for Mathematics? Is there any specific reason for this?
by mbuggieh4 years ago
CNN Reports:"The Higgs boson [particle] which was discovered last year, garnered two physicists the Nobel Prize in physics on Tuesday, but it didn't go to the scientists who detected it. Nearly 50 years ago,...
by Mahadeb Kar3 years ago
How can one win Nobel for peace ?
by neonline698 years ago
What do you think are the reasons for which the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Barack Obama?Barack Obama is the fourth President to win the Nobel Peace Prize behind Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Jimmy...
by Deforest5 years ago
The EU? IS IT A JOKE?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.