“M. Leibnits étoit un grand homme”: The role of argument from epistemic authority in Du Châtelet's dispute with Mairan

Abstract In my article, I propose to analyze the Du Châtelet‐Mairan dispute from the perspective of the modern theory of argumentation, focusing on the study of arguments from authority. I study separately the opinions of Du Châtelet and Mairan on the correct use of the argument from authority (Is the opponent using the argument correctly? Which part of the argumentation is questionable?) and their views on the argument itself (Is the argument from authority relevant in the dispute?). I aim to show that the two opponents transformed the theme of epistemic authority into one of the main issues of their dispute. I argue that both Du Châtelet and Mairan were careful about arguments from authority in scientific argumentations and question the possible shortcomings of the argument.