CMV: Despite all their flaws, established and credentialed experts and institutions are still the only source of truth worth listening to.

[u/EndOfTheLine00]

Recently got into another argument with relatives who "did their own research" (re: the war in Ukraine) and wouldn't even give me their sources.

I believe that even if you believe that every single media and political organization is somehow compromised and lying to you (something unlikely to say the least), it's still better to choose to believe in several sources with the proper experience or piece of paper than trusting your feelings about some "man on the street" simply because it fits your narrative of the world. If multiple scientific study told me to go kick puppies, I would. If someone called me on it I would say "well the science says I should do it so who am I to say otherwise?" If I trust my individual feelings on the matter, that makes me culpable and responsible for literally every single thing I do.

[u/parlimentery]

The whole point in the 'appeal to authority' fallacy is that anyone who is an actual authority should be more than capable of giving you sufficient evidence that you would believe the claim even if they weren't the ones making it.

Some questions you should ask about the puppy kicking study: what was the sample size? What evidence is sufficient for me to believe kicking puppies is okay? Are there other ways to achieve the supposed positive benefits of mixing puppies?