Please try to pay attention, this is getting embarrasing. No True Scotsman is a move that people make sometimes under certain circumstances. Those circumstances are...Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2023 12:26 am So how do we determine who has "the authority to prescribe what being a Scotsman/Christian is"?
Going back to my first post:Here I am not disagreeing with anything you said above. I am showing that Person A is exhibiting a lack of authority in prescribing what it is to be a Scotsman, and went on to imply that the authority would be a dictionary. You seem to agree by pointing out that "Crusades" and "Christians" have definitions that render the argument fallacious, or problematic.Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Sun Nov 26, 2023 1:46 pm Person A: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."
Person B: "But my uncle Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge."
Person A: "But no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."
This is simply a category error. A Scotsman is not defined by what they eat. They are defined by where they were born, or who their parents are. Just as women are not defined by what they wear. They are defined by what is between their legs and their chromosome type.
It's simple. Define a Scotsman and I'm sure that the reasonable and intellectually honest types will come to some sort of agreement.
So it appears that we have been in agreement all along and you and Flash simply wanted to argue for the sake of arguing.
1. A general claim is made:
- All Scotsmen are gingers / no Scotsmen are fat.
- All Republicans are fiscally conservative / No republicans vote for tax increases.
- You can tell a painting is good because the eyes follow you around the room.
- All Christians are good people because they accept Jebus as their saviour and so they know right from wrong.
- I know a Scotsman who is fat and has black hair.
- Trump exploded the budget deficit before Covid / Ronald Reagan increased taxes a lot.
- In Renoir's Luncheon of the Boating Party, nobody is looking out, except maybe one splodgy bloke at the back whose eyes you can't make out, so the eyes dont' follow you anywhere.
- All True Scotsmen have red hair.
- Ronald Reagan was a Republican In Name Only & RINO's aren't real Republicans.
- It would only be a great painting if the dog was looking out, and then only if his eyes followed you around.
- Torquemada was really all about the money, violence and sex, he wasn't a Christian like we are.
This isn't some case where there is a problem to be solved. It is just an example of an often unreliable pattern of reasoning that is not considered a very good way to pursue very defensible inferences. That's all it is.
If you are still too arrogant to take my word for it, perhaps Carneades can help. It's the only Youtube channel I recognise that is carrying any discussion of this not very important subject.