What is the No True Scotsman fallacy?

Response

The No True Scotsman (NTS) fallacy occurs when someone attempts to redefine a word to dismiss a valid counter-example. This fallacy is named after a common example used to illustrate the error. In this anecdote, one person claims, “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.” Another person replies, “I am Scottish and I put sugar on my porridge.” The first person then asserts, “Well, no genuine Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”

Specifically, the No True Scotsman fallacy is used to uphold a universal statement like “all X are Y” by dismissing a valid instance of the opposite, such as “here is an X that is not Y.” This tactic involves imposing a new condition that was not originally part of the definition and is often directed at that specific example. NTS is a type of ad hoc fallacy. Identifying NTS requires clear definitions of terms and ensuring their consistent use by all parties involved.

In the context of biblical Christianity, believers are often (incorrectly) accused of committing the No True Scotsman fallacy in one particular area. This serves as a helpful illustration to distinguish what NTS is and is not. The issue at hand pertains to eternal security, specifically the widely held Christian belief that a person who completely renounces faith in Christ was never truly saved. Some view this as a No True Scotsman fallacy. Initially, it may seem like asserting, “No genuine Christian would do that,” akin to the discussion about sugar and porridge.

However, these situations are fundamentally different. Regarding faith in Christ, the Bible teaches that a saved individual cannot lose their salvation (John 10

:28-29;Romans 8:38-39). The Bible also states that salvation will lead to a transformed life (2 Corinthians 3:18;Galatians 5:22-23). Individuals who persist in living without God were never truly saved initially (1 John 2:4-6;James 2:17-19), and neither were those who seem to “turn away” from the faith «They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. », (1 John 2:19). In essence, the idea of “not turning away” is a fundamental aspect of the biblical definition of salvation.

It is crucial to define the term “turns away.” In this context, we are referring to someone who completely renounces the faith, rejects Christ, declares themselves a non-believer, and so on. Being saved does not mean being without sin (1 John 1:8-10;2:1). A believer may still struggle with doubt, feelings of discouragement, or even anger towards God «Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. », (Galatians 6:1). Additionally, a believer may behave in unchristian ways at times (Mark 14:66-72). However, according to the biblical definition of salvation, there must be a lasting change of heart and mind, which rules out the type of “turning away” mentioned earlier.

The Christian perspective on those who completely sever ties with their faith is not a No True Scotsman fallacy; instead, it is an

Example of correctly using the definition of the word saved and not allowing it to be abused.

Another example that can help show the boundaries of the No True Scotsman fallacy is to imagine a box labeled “waterproof.” If that box is thrown into a swimming pool, and the box fills with water and sinks over the course of several hours, we are justified in saying, “It was never truly waterproof in the first place,” or “A truly waterproof box would never fill with water.” We would not be justified in saying, “Well, waterproof really means that water gets in slowly,” because that changes the definition of waterproof. Pointing out where observations don’t match the original description is not a No True Scotsman fallacy, as long as there is an actual, inherent conflict.

Conversely, if the box sank to the bottom of the pool right away but never let water in, it would be a No True Scotsman fallacy to say, “Well, a truly waterproof box won’t sink,” because, again, that’s not what it means to be “waterproof.” “Waterproof” and “floats” are two different things.

Where this particular claim becomes interesting, in terms of discussing religion, is that it’s often applied backwards. The No True Scotsman fallacy is an attempt to redefine a word more narrowly than it should be. Critics of religion tend to do the opposite: they redefine words more broadly than they were originally intended. For instance, it is fallacious to blame Christianity for everything done by someone who says the words, “I am a Christian.” Or to contend that a man who never goes to church, lives like the devil, and is generally immoral is “saved,” since he claims he is born again. Given what the Bible says about how salvation changes us, that’s an unreasonable definition of saved.

Accusations of the No True Scotsman fallacy are often levied at Christianity, particularly when it comes to salvation, by those who are actually committing an opposite error. Instead of using a too narrow definition of Christian, they use an ad hoc,

Overly broad definition, rather than the one that biblical Christianity actually uses.

As believers, we can avoid using the No True Scotsman fallacy by carefully defining our terms and then sticking to them. One is not committing NTS by pointing out a legitimate contradiction between a given example and the definition it’s being used to attack. However, we fail according to No True Scotsman when we change a definition specifically to avoid an example. Immediately casting doubt on the salvation of a professed believer caught in sin, for instance, is NTS writ large.

Likewise, it is not an example of the No True Scotsman fallacy to refine a definition when it’s clear that the original term or definition was incomplete or flawed. We simply need to ensure that we’re applying such measures according to truth, not some preferred conclusion. That should apply to both our faith and the beliefs of others.