Hacker News Reader

Comment by calderknight | Hacker News Reader

Epic logic fail. You're affirming the consequent.

Just because A -> B, and we have B, doesn't mean we can conclude A.

Sure,

    Idealogy -> a manner of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture

But

    A manner of thinking characteristic of an individual -> idealogy

Doesn't follow from that!

Ideology is often used both in the sense of "A well organized philosophy shared by numerous people" and "one's own personal philosophy".

For instance, from https://www.dictionary.com/browse/ideology, "the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual (...)"

Not everybody has a body of beliefs that guides him.

It's a definition, not a consequent. Definition is equality not if-then.

You'd be right if it was actually a definition. But it's not. It deals with the attributes of the thing rather than the thing's essence.

Like, the "definition" of car is 'a vehicle moving on wheels', but we can't from that conclude that all vehicles moving on wheels are cars.

I guess you have a more narrow definition of ideology!