Why do so many people think that feminists are not egalitarians?
From Wikipedia:
Feminism is a range of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women.
Emphasis mine. By definition, someone who does not believe in equality is not a feminist.
When a large number of people who don't live within the official boundaries of Scotland nevertheless loudly identify as Scotsmen (and have some historical ties to possibly legitimize their claim to the identity), saying "WikiAtlas defines the borders of Scotland as..." and then saying the people who don't live within those boundaries are not, by definition, Scotsmen, is by definition an example of a No True Scotsman fallacy.
I disagree. No True Scotsman suggests an ad-hoc modification to support a previously inadequate assertion. If we accept your, and (presumably) the previous posters understanding, we'd be able to dismiss, for example, countless syllogisms on the same grounds. Worse, we could reject any operational definition!
In your example, there's merely a simple disagreement with the definition which serves as the premise: all Scotsmen live in Scotland. You're miss the essential bits: First: the claim that there exists
egalitarian? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do so many people think that feminists are not egalitarians?
From Wikipedia:
Feminism is a range of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women.
Emphasis mine. By definition, someone who does not believe in equality is not a feminist.
Re: (Score:0)
No true scotsman logical fallacy.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it is not.
Re: (Score:2)
When a large number of people who don't live within the official boundaries of Scotland nevertheless loudly identify as Scotsmen (and have some historical ties to possibly legitimize their claim to the identity), saying "WikiAtlas defines the borders of Scotland as..." and then saying the people who don't live within those boundaries are not, by definition, Scotsmen, is by definition an example of a No True Scotsman fallacy.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. No True Scotsman suggests an ad-hoc modification to support a previously inadequate assertion. If we accept your, and (presumably) the previous posters understanding, we'd be able to dismiss, for example, countless syllogisms on the same grounds. Worse, we could reject any operational definition!
In your example, there's merely a simple disagreement with the definition which serves as the premise: all Scotsmen live in Scotland. You're miss the essential bits: First: the claim that there exists
Re: egalitarian? (Score:2)
I disagree. No True Scotsman suggests an ad-hoc modification to support a previously inadequate assertion.
So what you're saying is, "That's no true No True Scotsman fallacy!"
;-)
Dan Aris