Hypocrisy: A Theoretical Situation
September 7, 2007
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion regardless of who they are. Also each person is entitled to their own belief of what is right and what is wrong. One of the most debated subject in philosophy is the notion of right and wrong and the idea of an absolute truth. Some believe that there is no absolute truths and that everything is relative. However, others belief is an absolute right and wrong.
An example of this would be the situation where a group of people are together, and there is no leader or a form of law present. If someone in the group poses a threat, would it be right to single them out? Some believe there is, in order to preserve the survival and wellness of the group. Others believe we should not judge others based on what they are like.
If indeed we are entitled to our own opinions, do we not also have the right to change our minds based on what we believe? Our beliefs can change and thus we can change our own opinions as how we see fit.
Hypocrisy is the act of condemning or calling for the condemnation of another person when the critic is guilty of the act for which he demands that the accused be condemned.
source: Wikipedia: Hypocrisy
In the previous example, if the person who had posed a threat had a change in belief and another person emerged as a threat, and the previous person asked for the new threat to be singled out, do we say that he is a hypocrite?
Popularity: 19% [?]
Posted in Philosophy
content rss
September 7th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
Hmm… am not sure I got the exmaple right – bas if the second person who initially vited to singly off the first person is doing the same and the first person asked to do the same then:
1. First person is not a hypocrite, he wants revenge
2 Yes, second person is a hypocrite because he entitles himself to do what he wants others to discard..
hmm.. is that right!! :$
September 7th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
1. An essential part of not being an idiot is updating your opinion on receipt of new information.
2. If the person who is still a threat does not have the new information, then we cannot condemn him. We should either present the new information to him, or kill him and his family if that is not an option.
3. If upon receipt of the new information, the person does not change belief, then we must assume fault and attempt to resend the information.
4. If upon resending the information, the person does not change belief, then we must kill him and his family.
Changing a belief, and changing your course of action part-way through after a decision are very different, from what I have read.
September 7th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
ya what chika said
September 7th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
this country reeks of hipcricy!!
September 7th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
sorry 3al typos :$
September 7th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
I am completely 100% confused … anyways this sounds like a philosophy class i took … i now good with theory give me facts and i’ll work with that
September 7th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
We all are .. at some point in life we choose be hypocrites or act as one with out our knowledge . Either way it happens to all of us … just don’t get caught , thats all…
September 8th, 2007 at 5:09 am
i’ll have to say that i’m a bit confused !! but … first i believe that no one should judge no one else as for we are not their god ! yet i can tell you that in this situation it is a hypocrisy if he wants others to be singled out while he is a threat himself , then yeah it is .. lemme make it simple to you .. if you do stuff that you do not wana others to do then its is hypocrisy !! .. i hope i got this right ? :)
September 8th, 2007 at 10:45 am
I think that there is no absolute truth. There are as many truths as they are human beings [ ]. No one is exactly the same, not even twins.
I agree with Navy Girl when she says: “no one should judge no one else”
As Shale pointed out: “An essential part of not being an idiot is updating your opinion on receipt of new information.” We are all free to change our minds about a subject, and i think that it is part of growing up. Imagine if we still thought as if we were 6 years old, or even 20?!?
For the rest, i think that blaming/judging/condemning someone for something you did yourself means (in my opinion) that you have a problem with yourself, whatever you call it.
In French we have an interesting saying “Fais ce que je dis mais ne fais surtout pas ce que je fais!” translation: “Do what I tell you to do but don’t do what I do”. We usually say this about parents… because they blame us for mistakes they made themselves!
I think growing up means that you are wise enough to understand that we all go through different phases and we all make mistakes “to learn”, therefore, judging or condemning is useless. :)
September 8th, 2007 at 11:08 am
chikapappi,
Interesting the way you look at it. It is right, in its own way really! The idea was to make it interpreted in many different ways.
Shale,
You’re right about updating opinions based on new information. However, aren’t those who update their opinions mostly blamed for being hypocrites! What is if this person moves back and forth, and is undecided upon a stable belief!
eshda3wa,
What I said to chika :p
Pearls,
E, but how!
Laialy,
That’s good, the facts part. In truth every situation is different! Based on theory alone, we have to come up with solutions that address possible situations! For example, what if a smoker preaches about non smoking? Is that hypocrisy?
Grey,
True, we sometimes do that. Why does being caught important here?
Navy Girl,
You’re right. However is calling him a hypocrite a bad thing? He did change his opinions didnt he?
Sarah,
That’s a good saying, and is so true! If indeed we should not judge, but we are all human after all. We make assumptions and make judgments by instinct.
September 8th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
hyp·o·crite /ˈhɪpəkrɪt/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[hip-uh-krit] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.
[Origin: 1175–1225; ME ipocrite while doing another. This is as opposed to saying one thing when you said another.
However, I have changed my opinion on a number of things in the past, and I would accept it if people called me hypocritical. This may be related to your question on changing belief back and forth. I think it is just a good idea not to speak or act too soon, before you have collected enough information to be sure.
September 8th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
hyp·o·crite /ˈhɪpəkrɪt/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[hip-uh-krit] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.
[Origin: 1175–1225; ME ipocrite
September 8th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
(frickin’ html)
One could be perceived as a hypocrite for changing ones beliefs. The definitions seem to maintain that hypocrisy is saying one thing while doing another. This is as opposed to saying one thing when you previously said another.
However, I have changed my opinion on a number of things in the past, and I would accept it if people called me hypocritical. This may be related to your question on changing belief back and forth. I think it is just a good idea not to speak or act too soon, before you have collected enough information to be sure.
September 8th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
If he has stopped being a threat and sees that someone else is? he’s not a hypocrite, he’s rather experienced. I second shale here.
September 8th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
:)
September 9th, 2007 at 3:08 am
sure thing its bad .. but its all depends on the time he changed his mind .. i mean did he do that before changing his mind or he had to change his mind just for that ?? cuz in that case he is a hypocrite ..