Search results
The No True Scotsman Fallacy is a form of informal logical fallacy that is used to reject any counterexamples to an argument in order to protect a sweeping generalization. In essence, it involves redefining the terms of an argument in order to make it valid.
Jan 4, 2022 · Answer. No True Scotsman (NTS) is a logical error committed when someone tries to change the definition of a word in order to ignore a valid counter-example. The name of this fallacy comes from the cliché most often used to illustrate the mistake. In this story, a man says, “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”.
Jun 5, 2023 · Revised on August 7, 2023. The no true Scotsman fallacy is the attempt to defend a generalization by denying the validity of any counterexamples given. By changing the definition of who or what belongs to a group or category, the speaker can conveniently dismiss any example that proves the generalization doesn’t hold.
Apr 2, 2024 · No True Scotsman (NTS) refers to a logical fallacy that occurs when a debater makes a generalization of a group that requires observational evidence to support it. When confronted with evidence that instead clearly falsifies their claim, the debater fallaciously switches their claim from requiring evidence to being a definitional statement.
"The No-True-Scotsman Move" is the name given to this fallacy by its discoverer, Antony Flew. The name comes from a story that Flew tells: Imagine some aggressively nationalistic Scotsman settled down one Sunday morning with his customary copy of that shock-horror tabloid The News of the World .
The No True Scotsman fallacy is a fascinating and subtle error in reasoning that often sneaks into arguments unnoticed. It's a type of informal fallacy, which means it's not about the formal structure of an argument, but rather about the content and the way the argument is presented.
Dec 5, 2023 · Updated on Dec 5, 2023. No true Scotsman is a logical fallacy, meaning an error in reasoning, in which someone defends a generalization by redefining the criteria and dismissing examples that are contradictory.
