Browse By

“No true Muslim”: how to think using reality and facts


It took a few days, but the politicians are finally getting around to their obligatory declarations that the Paris attacks “have nothing to do with Islam” and that we must all become even more lefty in order to continue to prove that we are devoted to our ideology no matter what. No matter how many people are murdered, shot, blown up, gang raped, enslaved, beheaded, crucified, set on fire and thrown off buildings, nothing, absolutely NOTHING is more important than demonstrating one’s PC cred.

Meanwhile, we’ve got this hilarious video of French journalists and Paris Muslims all exclaiming that the fact that these were terrorist attacks proves the perpetrators are not “true Muslims.”

Here, let me help you with that.

There’s this thing, “a rhetorical fallacy,” which is something that people who know how to think try to avoid using so they can figure out what is true and what is stupid bullshit. This is what we used to call “thinking” with “clarity” based on “reality” and starting with “facts”.

Smarty-smart people in the past made up funny names for a bunch of them. You’ve probably heard of “ad hominem” and “straw man,” right? Aren’t they funny?

Well one of them is called the “No True Scotsman” fallacy, and it goes kind of like this, (only we’re going to edit it a little so you can be helped to see how it applies to us today with help from Wikipedia…see how easy it is to look things up? Easy and fun!):

“No True Muslim” is an informal fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion like “Islam means peace”. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim – like a bunch of guys claiming to belong to the Islamic state who kill a bunch of people and blow themselves up while yelling “Allahu Akbar” and who are later identified by the Islamic State as as Islamic State militants doing things for Islamic reasons – the No True Muslim fallacy will say, “It can’t be about Islam because no Muslim would do such a thing.”

Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule (“no true Muslim would do such a thing”).

In other words, it is simply a barefaced denial of the reality that is in front of all our eyes.

We are being gaslighted.

~

6 thoughts on ““No true Muslim”: how to think using reality and facts”

  1. Two2trees says:

    The orcs were elves once.

  2. Barbara says:

    I was trying to be a smart aleck – I stand corrected. Thanks.

  3. Hilary White says:

    I thought the elves were on our side.

  4. Tokenn says:

    I always refer the the ‘No True Whatever’ fallacy as the ‘Shifting definition” fallacy.. One of the difficulties in grappling with Islam is that the faith as a whole is highly sectarian, and many Muslims strongly disagree about the authenticity of many opposing sects…Sunni vs Shia is the most notable…to the point that many so-called Muslims are regarded as heretics. Of course the punishment for heresy, like apostasy, is death. So when some little hijabi or beardy weirdy Muslim spokesman says ‘That’s not Islam’ the rejoinder should be ‘Well, THEY think they are…’. But from some points of view, the spokesmen/women aren’t actually _lying_…they just have a highly nuanced notion of what Islam _is_. A view that doesn’t matter, in the final analysis.

  5. Hilary White says:

    I am acquainted with Michael Coren’s wife, since the family attended my parish in Toronto, and the general consensus is that she is a saint for putting up with him.

  6. Barbara says:

    Gee, we miss Ezra on Sun Media. He’s almost the last man standing in this sad country. And I mean the last MAN. We had Michael Coren, but his wife now keeps his balls in a little velvet box on the mantle in their condo.

    When the revolutionaries roll into town in those rickety old trucks the first place they head for is the radio station. Do they shoot lapdogs or toadies first?

Comments are closed.