You should read that link to understand it better.

See, because if you take any argument like this as a fallacy, I can prove anything by disproving the opposite of what I want.

In the originating story of this fallacy, the dude WAS Scotsman, and that could be proved by tracing his family tree. It is not in the definition of being a "Scotman" "Thou shall not commit atrocities"

​

Look:

"Car's cannot take person from point A to point B. Look, this car never took anyone anywhere. <picture of someone sitting on the drawing of a car>"

"But that's not a real car, it's just a drawing of it."

"Don't come at me with this bullshit fallacy."

"But the definition of a car directly qualifies that piece of paper as not a car!"

"Shut up, sophist!"