No true Scotsman - Revision history

DavidE: /* See also */ alphabetized; added example

2018-12-07T17:51:23Z

‎See also: alphabetized; added example

DavidE: internal link to Morton's fork

2018-08-03T16:56:48Z

internal link to Morton's fork

Shobson20: Undo revision 1430922 by JimmyX (talk) God is Love, there is no love in the KKK

2018-06-29T21:26:09Z

Undo revision 1430922 by JimmyX (talk) God is Love, there is no love in the KKK

JimmyX: Undo revision 1430792 by 1990'sguy (talk) why did you revert

2018-06-29T21:12:19Z

Undo revision 1430792 by 1990'sguy (talk) why did you revert

1990'sguy: Reverted edits by JimmyY (talk) to last revision by DavidE

2018-06-28T20:10:59Z

Reverted edits by JimmyY (talk) to last revision by DavidE

JimmyY: see rule 5

2018-06-28T19:47:18Z

see rule 5

DavidE: grammar; consolidated two "references" sections; added section on every true Scotsman

2015-12-18T13:49:12Z

grammar; consolidated two "references" sections; added section on every true Scotsman

Conservative: /* References */

2015-06-13T11:31:53Z

‎References

Conservative at 11:30, June 13, 2015

2015-06-13T11:30:36Z

Conservative: /* See also */

2015-06-12T06:24:45Z

‎See also

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 ==See also==
 *[[Confirmation bias]]
 *[[Distinction without a difference]]
-*[[Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy]]
+*[[Morton's fork]]
 *[[Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong]]

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 *"The Soviet Union was not a truly [[Communist]] country, as truly Communist countries would not have been so brutal and repressive."
 *"The [[9/11]] terrorists were not true Muslims, as [[Islam]] is a religion of peace."
-People employing the fallacy are not necessarily consistent.  For example, they may argue that the Soviet Union was a truly Communist country when they find something to like about it, but not when its atrocities and failings are pointed out to them.
+People employing the fallacy are not necessarily consistent.  For example, they may argue that the Soviet Union was a truly Communist country when they find something to like about it, but [[Morton's fork|not]] when its atrocities and failings are pointed out to them.
 The fallacy is not committed when the term has a clear and accepted definition and the example falls outside of that definition.  For example, someone saying that no true [[monotheist]] believes in multiple gods does not commit the fallacy, since the clear and accepted definition of a monotheist is someone who believes in only one God.

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 *"The Soviet Union was not a truly [[Communist]] country, as truly Communist countries would not have been so brutal and repressive."
 *"The [[9/11]] terrorists were not true Muslims, as [[Islam]] is a religion of peace."
 People employing the fallacy are not necessarily consistent.  For example, they may argue that the Soviet Union was a truly Communist country when they find something to like about it, but not when its atrocities and failings are pointed out to them.

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 *"The Soviet Union was not a truly [[Communist]] country, as truly Communist countries would not have been so brutal and repressive."
 *"The [[9/11]] terrorists were not true Muslims, as [[Islam]] is a religion of peace."
 People employing the fallacy are not necessarily consistent.  For example, they may argue that the Soviet Union was a truly Communist country when they find something to like about it, but not when its atrocities and failings are pointed out to them.

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 *"The Soviet Union was not a truly [[Communist]] country, as truly Communist countries would not have been so brutal and repressive."
 *"The [[9/11]] terrorists were not true Muslims, as [[Islam]] is a religion of peace."
 People employing the fallacy are not necessarily consistent.  For example, they may argue that the Soviet Union was a truly Communist country when they find something to like about it, but not when its atrocities and failings are pointed out to them.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 '''No true Scotsman''' is a [[logical fallacy]] and more specifically a special case of [[circular logic]].  It involves making an assertion and dismissing any counterexamples because they contradict the assertion.  Thus, the person making the assertion can refuse to admit that the assertion is [[falsifiable]].
-The ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' describes the no true Scotsman fallacy thusly:
+The ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' describes the no true Scotsman fallacy thus:
 {{cquote|No True Scotsman
@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 The fallacy is not committed when the term has a clear and accepted definition and the example falls outside of that definition.  For example, someone saying that no true [[monotheist]] believes in multiple gods does not commit the fallacy, since the clear and accepted definition of a monotheist is someone who believes in only one God.
 ==See also==
 *[[Confirmation bias]]
@@ Line 40: / Line 44: @@
 *[http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/no-true-scotsman/ No True Scotsman]
 {{reflist|2}}
 [[Category:Logical Fallacies]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:30, June 13, 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''No true Scotsman''' is a [[logical fallacy]] and more specifically a special case of [[circular logic]]. It involves making an assertion and dismissing any counterexamples because they contradict the assertion. Thus, the person making the assertion can refuse to admit that the assertion is [[falsifiable]].		'''No true Scotsman''' is a [[logical fallacy]] and more specifically a special case of [[circular logic]]. It involves making an assertion and dismissing any counterexamples because they contradict the assertion. Thus, the person making the assertion can refuse to admit that the assertion is [[falsifiable]].
		+
		+	The ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' describes the no true Scotsman fallacy thusly:
		+	{{cquote\|No True Scotsman
		+
		+	This error is a kind of [[ad hoc rescue]] of one's generalization in which the reasoner re-characterizes the situation solely in order to escape refutation of the generalization.
		+
		+	Example:
		+
		+	Smith: All Scotsmen are loyal and brave.
		+
		+	Jones: But McDougal over there is a Scotsman, and he was arrested by his commanding officer for running from the enemy.
		+
		+	Smith: Well, if that's right, it just shows that McDougal wasn't a TRUE Scotsman.<ref>[http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#NoTrueScotsman No True Scotsman Fallacy], ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy''</ref>}}

	The standard example, and the one that gives the fallacy its name, is as follows:		The standard example, and the one that gives the fallacy its name, is as follows: