How do you tell whether a person is actually part of a group and saying they aren't is a no true scotsman fallacy, or if that person really isn't part of that group despite that person saying so?
You grow up and stop using informal fallacies
>>370527
You clearly defines what it means to be part of said group, of course.
No true Scotsman is a fallacious fallacy. Or at least the example of a Scotsman is.
A Scotsman is a man with Scottish Nationality. Duh. I don't care if you think a man of African origin living in Scotland isn't Scottish, you're not the legal governing body deciding it.
The phrase should be No true Christian or some shit.
>>370527
angus is right tho, who the fuck sugars their porridge, its salt or nothing,
>>370569
"Legal governing bodies" don't determine anything regarding people's identity. If your parliament or congress came to the conclusion that you are gay I don't think it would suddenly mean you would be out packing fudge in truck stop bathrooms at night, just as much as a horse born in a garage would not be a car.
You know what's not a "fallacious fallacy"? Appeal to authority.
>>371077
If that authority is a dubious or erroneous one though.
So it's a maybe in that regard.
>>371077
I think appealing to authority is fine when the problem in question is nationality.
Who else are you going to appeal it to?
>>370569
Even then
For example, the Catholic Church has their lists of dogmatic beliefs. If you believe them you are Catholic. If you don't, you aren't.
>>370778
I do. It's good for breakfast, though it's better with honey, maple syrup, or golden syrup.
I'm no true scotsman though. I'm a frenchman and the auld alliance that could have made me a scot is dead.
>>371162
I don't see a problem with that.
>>371160
>I think appealing to authority is fine when the problem in question is nationality.
So like, you agree there's no such thing as the Kurds?
>>371077
>"Legal governing bodies" don't determine anything regarding people's identity
They do. They very much determine if you're a, say, Danish citizen or not. My being if I'm Danish or not is entirely up to whatever legal governing body in Denmark determines it.
>>371189
Aren't Kurds an ethnic group? There's a huge difference between someone's ethnicity and nationality.
>>371191
>Danish citizenship = being a Dane
>>371136
If we're talking about the modern concept of nationality, then yes of course it's the government. The idea of citizenship in the western world is more or less just a glorified residence permit than any sort of indicator of culture, though.
>>371189
As an Ethnic group but not a Nationality.
>>370569
Retard
>>371226
A Dane can be either someone who is ethnicity Dane or someone that have a Danish citizenship. And in the later case, there existing a legal governing body that very much decide if you're a Dane or not. You're saying that the later case isn't true, that a legal governing body can't determine something regarding people's identities.
While at it, you're using the "fallacious fallacy" wrong. The "fallacious fallacy" isn't a bunch of fallacies, it's discarding a whole argument or at least the conclusion solely based on the existence of a logical fallacy in it.
All ducks I've seen have been birds
Thus, all ducks are birds.
This isn't a sound argument because there's a logical fallacy in it, but discarding it wouldn't be right since we know that all ducks per definition are birds.
