1. Person A makes an ideological position X.
2. Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of the ideology X.
3. Therefore X is false.
2. Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of the ideology X.
3. Therefore X is false.
Such a reasoning is mere fallacious logic and is called Ad Hominem Tu Quoque fallacy.
The fact that a person makes inconsistent actions does not make any particular claim or ideological position she makes false. Also, the fact that a person's claims are not consistent with her actions might indicate that the person's life is not a specimen for the ideology she is holding in affair. And this inconsistency might arrives due to a number of reasons, she might have socially conditioned phobias, she could be helpless, or she could be a plain hypocrite. What ever the reason for the inconsistency, that isn't sufficient to act as a reason to conclude the ideology or claim she makes is merit-less.
