|
No true Scotsman is an informal fallacy, an ''ad hoc'' attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion.〔(No True Scotsman ), ''Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy''〕 When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim ("no Scotsman would do such a thing"), 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"). ==Examples== Philosophy professor Bradley Dowden explains the fallacy as an “ad hoc rescue” of a refuted generalization attempt.〔 The following is a simplified rendition of the fallacy:〔 :Person A: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." :Person B: "But my uncle Angus likes sugar with his porridge." :Person A: "Ah yes, but no ''true'' Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." The essayist Spengler compared distinguishing between "mature" democracies, which never start wars, and "emerging democracies", which may start them, with the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. Spengler alleges that "political scientists" have attempted to save the "US academic dogma" that democracies never start wars from counterexamples by maintaining that no ''true'' democracy starts a war. (See Democratic peace theory.) 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「No true Scotsman」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|