I don't want to segue the US Politics thread more, but I do want to explore the True Scotsman Fallacy presented by March Hare in the thread.
For context:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout
I don't want to derail this thread more than it already has but I NEED to point out the following:
Just because you call yourself a Christian/Muslim/Jew/Buddist/etc doesn't necessarily make you one.
If you don't believe in helping your neighbour regardless of their race or beliefs; if you don't believe in feeding the poor, or healing the sick; if you believe in money over people then it doesn't matter if you say "I love Jesus" or "I'm a Christian"... you're not Christian.
In the same vein that you can call yourself a Calgary Flames fan all you want, but if you're wearing an Oilers Jersey, cheer for Edmonton to win the division, and your favourite player is Darnell Nurse, then you're not actually a Flames fan.
|
With reply:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
|
The point I was making is that in order to be Christian you have to follow the teaching of Jesus. A fairly low bar, in my opinion.
However, if you don't follow the teachings of Christ, if you do the opposite an actively work against the teaching of Christ, then you cannot be Christian.
Essentially, just calling yourself a member of a group does not make you one.
I've never read the Torah, I've never had a bar mitzvah, so even if I called myself Jewish, I wouldn't be. I don't meet the requirements of the faith.
If you're born and raised in China, with Chinese ancestry without any European ancestors, I don't think it's a fallacy to say you're not a Scotsman.
Am I falling into the True Scotsman fallacy on that? I don't think I am as I'm not saying "If you say you're Jewish/Christian/Scottish/whatever without meeting the requirements, I'm saying not a True member of the faith/group", I'm saying you're not at all.
Hey, I could be misunderstanding. I could be wrong, and am open to having my mind changed (hence the thread and trying to lay out the background).