LEXLOCI

1 2 3 4


The dynamic of the Logic of the Ideologue is wherein ideals, principles, ideas and beliefs are held that may actually or potentially have no relation or conflict with actual states of circumstance and reality. When evidence and circumstance proceeds premises, argument and conclusion, it is termed Foundation Reasoning. When an abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother, the actual evidence might indicate that the preference of the mother's other children would be the preservation of her life as opposed to the principle 'the fetus is sacred'. When authority proceeds evidence and premises such that the both evidence or premises are made to correspond and conform with the authority, it is termed Authority Reasoning. Authority Reasoning means that a conclusive authority, such as a principle, proceeds evidence, premises and arguments. For instance a human fetus is considered sacrosanct and must be brought to term no matter the circumstances. This principle is conclusion as an authority that pre-exists circumstance, evidence and argument such as when the life of the mother is in jeopardy. The principle is an authority that is considered solid, true, inviolate, absolute unchanging, perhaps eternal, above or not subject to the physical, such as God or ideals of things like country, freedom, order or justice. Thus in the case of God as an authority, the conclusion is that God is good, perfect, all-powerful and eternal. These attributes are considered true no matter the circumstance and proceed evidence, premises and argument. If the tornado misses the church the premise and argument may be that God prevented this catastrophe and all praise to God. However if the circumstance is different and the tornado hits and destroys the church, the conclusive authority that God is good is the same and inviolate. The premises and argument concerning the circumstance and reality of the destruction of the church must change. The premise is never offered that God destroyed the church or that God should have and could have saved the church. Other premises may be offered such as the devil did it, or the stranger that was around late last week, acting suspiciously, may have cursed the church or some such thing. In terms of Authority Reasoning, the logic, argument and premises must construe the evidence so that it supports the authority as principle and prior conclusion. Thus the Ideologue argues by the dynamics of Authority Reasoning.

Problems arise for the Ideologue when circumstances of reality conflict and contradict imperatives, standards, ideals and principles. The authority is unassailable for instance in the case of God. Thus the Ideologue can ignore reality as in the case of planetary warming.

IDEOLOGUE (3 OF 4)             NEXT PAGE

art