An interesting thought has been reoccurring in the "free zone" of my tattered brain. "Why is it we seem to forgive those that are complete fuck ups as long as they have never claimed to be anything else, but we crucify anyone that claims to be good and has a failing?" It seems we humans have a natural aversion to hypocrisy. As a father, I know that any teenager worth their piercings is going to call you a hypocrite at one time or another. But what is a hypocrite? Should we wear it as a badge of honor, or hide our face in shame? Can the very idea shape the way we look at crimes? should it? When is it O.K. to be a hypocrite? Let's take a look at what I've come up with while pondering the philosophy of hypocrisy.
I guess the first question we should ask ourselves is: "What is hypocrisy and when are we guilty of it?" Well, the clearest definition I could find is,"Insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have." That seems simple enough for me. Practice what you preach. But what is it exactly that someone who's trying to be good believes in? I think that's where it falls apart. We like to think that someone who holds themselves to a higher standard is somehow saying that they're perfect. So, when they show themselves not to be, we attack them as hypocrites, pretending to be something they're not. I think the crucial word here is "pretending". If your intent is trying to be a better person, then I don't see any hypocrisy. If your intent is to deceive people about your character, and you have no intention of trying to change your behavior, then you are indeed a hypocrite.
All that doesn't fit most people's definition of what a hypocrite is. An example of what most people think of when they think of a hypocrite is; Someone who had a child out of wedlock, or who did drugs as a young adult, now trying to give advice on how someone else should live. If you think about it, that doesn't fit the definition. Certainly, learning from your past mistakes and then using that knowledge doesn't mean you have two separate beliefs. It simply means you've learned.
Now, if I were to decide that I can't judge my kids behavior because mine was every bit as bad, I've just given my kids a free pass on some of the behavior that I thought was the most destructive on my life. If every generation keeps doing that and adding any transgressions of their own, my logic tells me you'll have a society that makes more and more mistakes. I want my kids to know I think smoking cigarettes is bad for you, even if I smoked them myself. I want my kids to make less mistakes than I did. I see no hypocrisy.
Finally, if we don't judge someone's behavior just because they'll tell you right off, "I'm a Jerk", "I'm a bit of a Player", or "I can be an asshole sometimes." We give them permission to act that way. Think about it, if the behavior is bad, what does it matter that you admit it? If someone says, "Yeah, I'm a racist." Does that make the behavior acceptable? NO. We need to be a little less forgiving of the people who act badly with no apologies and more forgiving of the people who try but fall. If we suspect that someone may be putting up a front for personal gain, by all means call them out. However, when you see someone who has done a lot of good in their life but had a moment of failing, we need to be a little forgiving. If there is no incentive for people to try to be good and total forgiveness for people who don't even care, we shouldn't be surprised that most people would rather simply give in to their temptations and admit it.... than take a chance at being crucified if they fail once. H.C.
P.S. I'll be out of town on vacation for the next week. I promise I'll answer any comments as soon as I get back.
9 comments:
Hippie,
Interesting post. My take:
I think most people don't get as put off by people's transgressions (especially when we all have them). Rather, I think they get most upset when they feel like they've been unknowingly deceived by the other person's actions. I mean, even the very term "hypocrite" is derived from the Greek word hypokrites; meaning one who plays a part; an actor. This isn't to say that the behavior of which they take part isn't deplorable or upsetting. It's just that doing it under the guise of being a do-gooder is problematic for most folks. Telling kids not to smoke while you have a cigarette in your mouth tells them that you're playing the role of someone who sees the danger of cigarettes when -- in fact -- "true" identity is revealed by your actions.
Dude, I think you already know the answers to the questions you raised in this post. But an interesting post nonetheless...
Hey Dre
You said,"Telling kids not to smoke while you have a cigarette in your mouth tells them that you're playing the role of someone who sees the danger of cigarettes when -- in fact -- "true" identity is revealed by your actions."
Couldn't someone who is hooked on cigarettes give advice to someone who isn't, not to become hooked like them? It seems you can learn the lesson after the damage is done and try to help others before they get hurt themselves. It does fit the definition though, as your behavior wouldn't be in line with your beliefs. But there does seem to be a subtle difference in motive.
Hi Andre and H.C. :)
You two have strayed from
hypocracy into the realm of addiction. And as such, one cannot label the addict with hypocracy.
He says: "Don't do this it's bad!"
He truly know's and believe's this.
His belief coincides with his message.
However, the addiction over rules
his mental and or physical being.
Take care guy's,
Rod Ryker...
H.C
I just want to pass on a defention of hypocrisy I learned from theologigan R.C. Sproul. He defines hypocrisy as proclaiming yourself to have attained a level of moral conduct you have not achieved. To have a set of goal or objectives and NOT achieve them does not make one a hypocrite. However to act belligerent to someone who has failed where you also have failed is an act of hypocrisy.
Just thought I would pass on that defention,it makes sense to me.
Thanks, John
Well put Rod,
The point I'm trying to make here is that learning from your behavior or attempting to restrain from bad behavior isn't hypocrisy just because you once participated in it or strayed into it. To many people view hypocrisy as; if you don't advocate it, you better not do it or have ever done it. Funny how we don't hold any standards at all for people who just flat out don't care how they behave. I would much rather surround myself with people who try to be good than those that make no effort. Thanks for your comment.
Hey John,
"proclaiming yourself to have attained a level of moral conduct you have not achieved." Fair enough. I like Sproul's definition because it focuses on the overall level of morality as opposed to any one event, yet he makes it clear that assuming Moral Superiority has a very high standard. Thanks for that great definition.
Each push up helped him keep crime off the streets ofLazy Town and keep the beds of the ladies warm throughthe nights. That `old lady has done justabout every horny man in Lazy Town starting with youruncle.
alt sex stories incest
free nasty porn stories
free erotic swinger stories
animal sex stories for free
free erotic bondage stories
Each push up helped him keep crime off the streets ofLazy Town and keep the beds of the ladies warm throughthe nights. That `old lady has done justabout every horny man in Lazy Town starting with youruncle.
Eric yanked the back of the chair, sending Chuck flopping over on hisback Mikey, hands up, stood up and backed himself against the wall. He lay down next to me and started to kiss and lick my cuntin a way no other man had ever done before.
shit eating stories femdom
sex stories dog stories
rape sexual stories
adult sex stories gay
female bondage stories
Eric yanked the back of the chair, sending Chuck flopping over on hisback Mikey, hands up, stood up and backed himself against the wall. He lay down next to me and started to kiss and lick my cuntin a way no other man had ever done before.
Post a Comment