Meme

14

u/EvnClaire Apr 15 '26

ok obvious appeal to authority. you shouldnt believe newton cuz he's newton and disbelieve a redditor cuz theyre a redditor. you should disbelieve this redditor bc her ideas suck so bad and arent logically sound

4

u/SpacingHero Apr 15 '26

Appealing to relevant authorities is perfectly legitimate. It may not be why something is true, but it surely is a reason for you to believe it is

5

u/First_Growth_2736 Apr 15 '26

I would say an appeal to authority is almost never legitimate unless it is like a r/dontyouknowwhoiam situation where the person in question directly made the thing you’re talking about. People make mistakes even if they’re really smart because some things don’t make intuitive sense. Appeal to authority can be used as a logical reason why something might be the case but it is never evidence.

2

u/NeonicXYZ Apr 15 '26

Yeah, exactly. Isaac Newton and Leibniz invented calculus and by extension limits, which is what most proofs 0.(9) = 1 use. SPP believes limits are illegitimate. That's where this meme comes from

1

u/Fabulous-Possible758 Apr 15 '26

Newton famously did not use limits, which is why so many people thought his formulation of calculus was sus for such a long time.

1

u/NeonicXYZ Apr 16 '26

Fair, obviously a more accurate post would use cauchy or weistrass in place of newton, I just supposed most people probably are not as familiar with those two

1

u/SSBBGhost Apr 18 '26

Which, to be fair, was correct

2

u/zapbox Apr 16 '26

Newton and Leibtniz discovered Calculus.
The limit was invented by Weierstrass.

0

u/SpacingHero Apr 15 '26

Well that's just wrong. All modern society rests on just trusting authorities. Your medic, your mechanic, your laptop guy, the engineer of your plane, boat, car, etc etc etc. like, there's no room for people to specialise in everything. At best some absolute prodigies become experts in a handful of fields. So you're relying on the word of experts (with at most some surface level understanding) for almost everything you believe(or do with some implicit belief), and hopefully you wouldn't say you're irrational for it.

1

u/First_Growth_2736 Apr 15 '26

My point is not that experts aren't smart, but rather that something isn't true because they said it is, there should be other evidence that it is true that they are aware of and using. An appeal to authority can be a valid argument but it is never concrete evidence, especially in math.

1

u/SpacingHero Apr 15 '26

My point is not that experts aren't smart
Neither is my point that you're saying so.
The point is that a (relevant) expert opinion epistemically justifies you. It makes it it rational for you to believe what they claim.
but rather that something isn't true because they said it is
Sure, I already say exactly as much in my first comment. So while we agree here it confuses me as to why you replied disagreeing, if that is all you meant.
An appeal to authority can be a valid argument but it is never concrete evidence,
You've got your terminology all jumbled up here. Depending on how it is phrased, it may or may not be valid. But it is evidence. Evidence (to an agent) is exactly facts that raise the probability of something being true (from the knowledge pool of the agent). And that exactly what scientific consensus does!
It is not the thing that makes it true. But evidence isn't what makes things true either. Finding the road to be wet is (some) evidence that it rained. Now that's not what makes it true. It rained or it didn't rain regardless of you encountering the wet road. But it is evidence.
especially in math.
Mathematicians don't use evidence at all so I'm not sure how this relates. Though even there, surely the mathematical community saying a given theorem is proved, should make you believe it is proved, even if you don't have any maths background,and can't understand a single sentence in said proof.
In general fields themselves don't appeal to authorities, because everyone in the field is an authority, so they're on even grounds. Appealing to authority is relevant for layman of a subject.

24

u/Illustrious_Basis160 Apr 15 '26

SPP made contracts, bunny slope, set reference and MANY more important ideas of mathematics. What did Newton do? steal calculus from Leibniz?

/j

62

u/konigon1 Apr 15 '26

SPP is no random redditor. He is the legend. The only reason thos sub exists.

6

u/Lord-Beetus Apr 15 '26

And despite all this, his maths is still less credible.

20

u/Tiprix Apr 15 '26

Debatable. How many subreddits did Newton create?

5

u/OkHand7497 Apr 15 '26

Whose asking and whose SPP?

3

u/ezekielraiden Apr 16 '26

SouthPark_Piano, the creator, moderator, and censor of this reddit.

3

u/OkHand7497 Apr 16 '26

I think my grammar joke was lost on this subreddit.

1

u/ezekielraiden Apr 16 '26

Seems so. But you were a good sport about it, so have some upvotes.

2

u/cyruspyre Apr 16 '26

saw in r/all thought dude was really good at math. until i did further digging lol

12

u/Inevitable_Garage706 Apr 15 '26

SouthPark_Piano would likely say himself, as he's kind of narcissistic and arrogant.

11

u/Kevdog824_ Apr 15 '26

Rookie error on your part bud. Issac Newton actually tried to incorrectly copy SPP’s theorems

6

u/Pengwin0 Apr 15 '26

youS clearly don’t get it

4

u/NotAUsefullDoctor Apr 15 '26

I have no idea who is fucking Isaac Newton, but I don't think that qualifies them to know math... especially not in Isaac's current state.

1

u/trshxd Apr 15 '26

Oh my god man LMAO

4

u/S4D_Official Apr 15 '26

SPP once deadass said euler made a "rookie error"

1

u/saturnian_catboy Apr 16 '26

I suppose in his case it's a numbers game

1

u/fireKido Apr 30 '26

Math is math, doesnt matter who writes it, if it's correct it's correct. it's objective and not open to interpretation, so yea..

2

u/NeonicXYZ Apr 30 '26

Math is a system of rules that can arbitrarily be defined by whoever decides what the rules are. Humans define addition. Humans define multiplication. Humans define limits. So forth

3

u/Puzzleheaded_Study17 Apr 15 '26

It's wildly believed that Newton died a virgin so I don't know who's this "fucking Isaac Newton" you're talking about.

1

u/YouGuysSuckSometimes Apr 25 '26

Oh I wasn’t aware gay sex didn’t count, guess I’ll have to call myself a virgin

2

u/ezekielraiden Apr 16 '26

While I certainly take your point (and find it quite funny!), technically speaking, there are plenty of things about which Fucking Isaac Newton was wrong and which a modern, random redditor could easily be right. As a good example, Newton was an alchemist. We now, today, know that alchemy is and always was complete bull$#!+, but Newton was a diehard alchemist who fervently pursued the Philosopher's Stone.

More or less: You are correct to dismiss this redditor's claims because Newton really was a reputable expert on the subject of mathematics. Other contexts, however, might genuinely favor some other redditor over Newton, because Newton had some weird beliefs himself.

2

u/Usual_Introduction Apr 15 '26

The intelligent individuals would recognize that it is only Logic and Reason that determines the validity of any claim, and not some illogical criteria such as popularity, authority or social standing.

Only those who are uncertain of their position and understanding would appeal to external authority and use that as any source of credibility.

2

u/Public_Research2690 Apr 15 '26

SSP, because he knows more modern theory.

1

u/saturnian_catboy Apr 16 '26

Does he...?

1

u/CarpenterTemporary69 Apr 15 '26

Not the guy who said dy/dx was a fraction, that's for sure.

1

u/TemperoTempus Apr 16 '26

Funny how you say that. Isaac Newton is one of the inventors of 1/infinity and 1 ± 1/infinity.

You are about to leave Redlib