Comment by cj

Comment by cj 15 days ago

2 replies

> "If p then q" does not imply "If q then p."

My original comment is challenging whether "p then q" is valid in the first place by asking if the inverse would be true as a thought experiment. (Neither is true IMO)

Just because someone has certain values doesn't mean they vote a certain way.

Just because they vote a certain way doesn't mean they have certain values.

"p" (who you voted for) and "q" (your values) are largely independent for a large percentage of voters.

MajimasEyepatch 14 days ago

My point is that the validity and soundness of the inverse proposition has no bearing on the validity and soundness of the original proposition, so you’ve proposed a meaningless experiment.

I also think that your hypothesis that voting and values are not connected is false, but that’s a separate issue.

  • cj 14 days ago

    I understand your point and I agree with it. I didn't respond to it directly because it wasn't contributing to the discussion at hand. But I agree with your point that an inverse proposition doesn't always hold!