Final answer:
In science, authority alone is not considered strong evidence because it lacks objective empirical support. Scientific research and empirical evidence are required to validate theories and hypotheses.
Step-by-step explanation:
Authority alone is not considered strong evidence in science because it is important to have objective evidence to support claims. Science relies on systematic scientific research and the gathering of empirical evidence to validate theories and hypotheses. The use of authority without supporting evidence can lead to subjective biases and potential inaccuracies. For example, in the past, many authorities believed that the Earth was flat, but scientific evidence eventually proved otherwise.
Moreover, scientific credibility is rooted in the principle that claims must be supported by evidence that other scientists can examine, experiments others can replicate, and theories that withstand critical evaluation. The process is inherently skeptical; researchers must continuously validate their hypotheses with data and be open to criticism and revision. This approach helps guard against the fallacies of weak induction, where conclusions are drawn from insufficient evidence.
By prioritizing evidence over authority, science maintains a self-correcting mechanism that gradually leads to a more accurate understanding of the natural world. This process ensures that science does not stagnate but evolves with new discoveries, always subject to revision in the light of new evidence.