So, when I argue with Male Rights Activists, they often cite the No True Scotsman logical fallacy. The context being that the MRA says, I know a feminist who says A, B, and C. Feminists then reply, Well, that person cant possibly be feminist because we dont believe those things. We believe D, E, and F. The MRA then cites the No True Scotsman fallacy, suggesting it is a logical fallacy for us to exclude the feminists who made the claims A, B, and C. Now, heres why that is a misapplication of the No True Scotsman fallacy: Feminism is an ideology, with specific beliefs attached. If someone says, I am a feminist and I believe that women are less than men, then that is in direct contradiction with the ideology of feminism and can be logically excluded. The No True Scotsman fallacy revolves around demographics and other groups which have no specific platform or official grounds for membership. Feminism, being an ideology, philosophy, and movement, can logically be said to have certain rational requirements. We can rationally exclude someone who says, Women are better than men, from the movement because that statement is in direct contradiction with the ideology of feminism. Thats all, thank you.
Posted on: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 19:38:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015