I felt like both mine and Infs posts explain it well enough, but according to your and aquas confusing ratings you don't seem to get it. I'm trying to look at your statements from a logical standpoint and what you said makes about 0 sense. So I'll try and explain it simply.
Reconstructed using letters you're saying the following statement: "If A and B, then C".
A = Inf thinks Hip is the vigilante.
B = Inf continues pushing for a lynch on Hip.
C = Inf will think hip gets suspicious and kills Inf during the night.
Thats litterally what you're saying right here:
"Say for instance, Inffy thought that Hip was the Vigilante, that would mean that if Inf kept pushing for a lynch of Hip, he would get suspicious and night kill him.". You're trying to argue what Infs thoughtprocess was by saying that if Inf thinks Hip is the vig and Inf continues to push for a lynch on Hip, Inf will think hip is going to kill Inf during the night.
Keep in mind I've drawn these statements from your argument, so in the arguments you've provided Inf appearently has a deathwish. Why you ask? Well since he kept pushing for the lynch on Hip, and according to you that means he thinks Hip will kill him during the night. Why would Inf keep pushing for a lynch on Hip if he thought it'd be his death? I doubt Inf wants to die. If Inf truely thought that, then he wouldn't keep pushing for the lynch. Thus we can conclude there is something wrong here. This leaves us with two scenarios that explain what's wrong with the logic here. (No there are not more)
- This isn't how Infs mind works at all. Your idea of infs thought process being "If A and B, then C" is wrong, and Inf does not have this thought process. In his mind A and B do not result in C, and thus your argument is wrong and you can't argue Hips death has anything to do with Inf trying to save himself.
- This is how Infs mind works, and Inf would react in the way described in "If A and B then C". We KNOW for a fact that B is true(ctrl+f hips name through pages 1-12 if you don't believe it). Since this is how Infs mind works, either A or C or both have to be false otherwise you're trying to argue that even though Inf thinks pushing for a lynch on Hip is gonna get him killed, he did it anyways. Inf is not an idiot and does not have a deathwish, so yes we can conclude that either A or C HAS to be false in this scenario.
It's likely that we live in scenario two as the statement itself isn't that far of a grasp. Most people probably think that if they're pushing for a lynch on a vigilante they're likely going to get killed during the night. So I'd argue we live in scenario 2, but I'll explain why you're wrong in scenario 1 aswell.
There is another statement added to this that I hadn't mentioned yet which is also decently important to your argument. I'll give it the letter D. You're saying "If C then D". If I put the entire statement professionaly you'd get: "(A ∧ B) → C → D".
D = Inf kills Hip to save himself.
So you're saying that if Inf thinks Hip is going to kill him, he will kill Hip to try and save himself. A flaw in itself is that if Hip were truely the vig and was going to kill Inf, Inf would die anyways and thus there is no 'saving' at all, only a tie. Which is why I think the saving part is stupid in its entirety. In scenario 1 the entire statement is wrong as that is not Infs thought process, and if he doesn't think Hip is going to kill him why would he kill Hip to 'save himself' or kill hip in general? In scenario 1 here there is no connection you can draw to argue that Inf killed hip. The only connection is that Inf pushed for a lynch on Hip and Hip got killed by the Mafia. Other than that you can't argue that somehow this proves that Inf is mafia and therefor your argument is wrong in scenario 1.
So onto scenario 2. Like I said in scenario 2, we've deduced that either A or C has to be false. In order for C to be false, using the logic statement we have A also has to be false since C is true if A is true. Therefor in scenario two A has to be wrong. Inf did not think Hip was the vig therefor Inf had no reason to not keep pushing on a lynch on Hip. Inf did not think that Hip was going to kill him during the night, and because C is thus false Inf did not kill hip to 'save himself'. There is again no way you could argue that somehow Hips death proves Inf is Mafia as scenario 2 does not result in D.
TL;DR: Foggy's argument against Inf is flawed and wrong. Feel free to try and prove me wrong or tell me I missed something but I'm pretty sure everything I said was pure sound logic and theres nothing wrong with it. And inb4 you try to 'well maybe he thought Hip was another PR!1!!1!!', thats pure speculation and you can say that for litterally anyone. Truth is we don't know why Hip died, though if you're arguing Inf wanted him out of the game I could argue the exact same for Foggy and Aqua who as Mafia got voted alot by Hip last game.
Also I spend waay too much time on this send help.
