Re: [asa] True Scotsman fallacy - was Of m....

*One can start with a scientific theory and then refine it as more knowledge
comes in.*

And why is the same method of reasoning precluded in other areas? Refining
an argument isn't the exclusive province of science.

On 7/31/06, Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/31/06, David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > *The fallacy being that in the face of contrary evidence, you make an
> > arbitrary adjustment to your original premise.*
> >
> > I kind of hate the "fallacy" game -- the "fallacy fallacy" if you
> > will. It's too easy, every time your adversary makes some adjustment or
> > nuances a point, to cry "fallacy." Who defines why something like this is a
> > "fallacy" and not a proper refinement of an argument? And, back to the mote
> > and beam, hasn't evolutionary science done exactly the same thing? Natural
> > selection doesn't quite do it? Ok, add genetic drift. Abiogensis doesn't
> > do it? Ok, try panspermia. No real explanation? Ok, assert "time and
> > chance of the gaps." What's the difference?
> >
>
>
> I don't think that's the same thing at all.
>
> One can start with a scientific theory and then refine it as more
> knowledge comes in. E.g. Newton's second law becoming subject to
> relativistic correction clearly isn't an arbitrary adjustment. Perhaps the
> equivalent "No true .." to this would be if you said "No experiment
> measuring an accelerating body violates F=MA". Then you get measurements
> that show the Relativistic correction. "Ah, you say, no TRUE experiment
> violates F=MA, therefore yours can't be a proper experiment".
>
> Yes I've seen a page by a Christian on the "The No True Scotsman Fallacy
> Fallacy" and a rejoinder by an atheist called "The No True Scotsman Fallacy
> Fallacy Fallacy" etc.
>
>
> Iain Strachan (despite the name, not in any way a "true" Scotsman, in fact
> an Englishman who likes sugar on his porridge!)
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jul 31 10:15:32 2006