I do find authority to be inherently suspicious, because it substitutes use of force for the use of rationality, and usually only for the sake of the authority-haver's personal convenience.
If you are correct, and can prove it, no authority is required. Otherwise the authority, if available, is inevitably used to win by rhetorical distraction rather than by the strength of the reasoning. And a swat on the noggin with a baton is very distracting indeed. As they say, you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.
That's not to say authority is useless. It is often the only way to achieve timely results. But is is no less suspicious, and should always be ratified by a deliberative, non-authoritative process.