Proof that Richard Dawkins is full of shit (if you need any more):
1 He claims repeatedly that the problem with religious believers is that they cannot or will not ever change their mind
2 He writes books attempting to get them to change their minds
1 He claims repeatedly that the problem with religious believers is that they cannot or will not ever change their mind
2 He writes books attempting to get them to change their minds
He even formulates this as a very precise NO TRUE SCOTSMAN argument.
D: Fundamentalists never change their minds.
E: But this fundamentalist did.
D: The he was no true fundamentalist.
D: Fundamentalists never change their minds.
E: But this fundamentalist did.
D: The he was no true fundamentalist.
How does he KNOW that “NO real fundamentalist” would ever say such a thing?
None? None at all? Not one? How does he GET that universal fact?
Definitionally, of course. If a fundamentalist DID say something ilke that, he would not BE a fundamentalist, eo ipso.
None? None at all? Not one? How does he GET that universal fact?
Definitionally, of course. If a fundamentalist DID say something ilke that, he would not BE a fundamentalist, eo ipso.
This is possibly the clearest textbook example of a No True Scotsman I’ve ever seen.
In fact, I think I’ll use it in my classes as a “textbook” example.
In fact, I think I’ll use it in my classes as a “textbook” example.
