It's not 'no true Scotsman.' NTS applies to illogical segmentation: a Scotsman is such by birth and the only certain logical segments are those which would apply to all Scotsmen. For example, 'no true Scotsman is Spanish' is a logical statement whereas 'no true Scotsman likes tapas' is not. But the claim that no credible Pizzagate researcher believes that Hillary is the ringleader is not a no true Scotsman fallacy at all. To the contrary, it is merely stating that such a claim is not credible and therefore anyone making the claim is not credible. To further illustrate, 'no true Yankees fan supports the Red Sox,' 'no true man of peace supports genocide,' or 'no credible researcher believes Bigfoot shot JFK' are also not NTS fallacies.
This is off-topic, but it's a pet peeve when people who don't know what they're talking about toss around logical fallacy claims.
No true Scotsman is a kind of informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect a universal generalization from counterexamples by changing the definition in an ad hoc fashion to exclude the counterexample. Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule ("no true Scotsman would do such a thing"; i.e., those who perform that action are not part of our group and thus criticism of that action is not criticism of the group).
The argument can be sketched out this way.
Pizzagate people believe X.
No they don't .
Example after example of pizzagate people believing X.
No credible person looking into pizzagate believes X.
view the rest of the comments →
truthstrangerthanfic ago
unlike the CRACKED piece from the other day, this one has my favorite strawman:
"...the Washington pizza shop Comet Ping Pong was headquarters for a child-abuse ring run by Hillary Clinton."
no credible person looking into pizzagate has ever claimed that Clinton or Podesta is the ringleader of anything.
AreWeSure ago
you just made a no true scotsman argument.
DryMartini ago
It's not 'no true Scotsman.' NTS applies to illogical segmentation: a Scotsman is such by birth and the only certain logical segments are those which would apply to all Scotsmen. For example, 'no true Scotsman is Spanish' is a logical statement whereas 'no true Scotsman likes tapas' is not. But the claim that no credible Pizzagate researcher believes that Hillary is the ringleader is not a no true Scotsman fallacy at all. To the contrary, it is merely stating that such a claim is not credible and therefore anyone making the claim is not credible. To further illustrate, 'no true Yankees fan supports the Red Sox,' 'no true man of peace supports genocide,' or 'no credible researcher believes Bigfoot shot JFK' are also not NTS fallacies.
This is off-topic, but it's a pet peeve when people who don't know what they're talking about toss around logical fallacy claims.
AreWeSure ago
That's not what no true Scotsman is.
No true Scotsman is a kind of informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect a universal generalization from counterexamples by changing the definition in an ad hoc fashion to exclude the counterexample. Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule ("no true Scotsman would do such a thing"; i.e., those who perform that action are not part of our group and thus criticism of that action is not criticism of the group).
The argument can be sketched out this way.
Pizzagate people believe X.
No they don't .
Example after example of pizzagate people believing X.
No credible person looking into pizzagate believes X.
And for the record, the claim NYPD found something compromising in Weiner's emails started with this guy and he claimed Hillary Clinton was at the center of a trafficking ring. https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2016-11/4/7/asset/buzzfeed-prod-fastlane01/sub-buzz-5512-1478259424-1.png?
stellarcorpse ago
An intellectual. I'm impressed.
stellarcorpse ago
ok. who down voted me Birdzeyeview?? I was not being fictitious I was being honest. Intellectuals are sexy as fuck.