Yeah, there's some truth in that..

Which is why I now define things this-way..

• axiom-based?
• identity-anchoring?
• rejecting falsification-by-evidence?
• seeks self-consistency in some way?

Then it's a paradigm and it can be worldview, ideology, prejudice, religion/"religion", or formal-system.

ALL of those 5 reject the falsification of the paradigm they're standing-within.

Hofstadter's book "Godel Escher Bach" almost communicated that, but stopped short of identifying that it is paradigm, not formal-system or mind-regime: paradigm includes all-5.

& only a mind standing outside of a paradigm can honestly falsify that paradigm.

More interesting, though, are open-&-evolving worldviews, which are .. dynamically-transforming-paradigms?

The more-universal the frame-of-reference, the better..

_ /\ _