Appeal to authority

When it comes to an argument, the argumenter is not important. When it comes to a tradition or a fact, there is and there is. The argument can be examined on its merits, facts are based on the trust you have in the person who testifies to them. Regarding the rules of halacha, that's a different matter altogether. Halacha was established to end the disputes and establish a bottom line. This is not just a statement about a person's character. Incidentally, even with regard to these determinations, despite the ruling, the later poskim and sages did not really adhere to them. They do not make generalizations even where it is stated that "except". Therefore, Maimonides allows himself to rule as I do on issues that are not part of the Ya'al Kagam (Do not gather, for I am not a servant, I am not a servant). Even in a legal system, the claimant is not important, only the claim, but if the court or the legislature has determined it, we do not argue. There is legal authority. I have written more than once about substantive and formal authority. There is formal authority in halakha, and against it there is no place for autonomy. But it is not right to attribute formal authority to institutions or individuals who do not have such authority. This is the value of autonomy.