This thread follows from another thread on "Going to church but being an atheist":
http://www.frihost.com/forums/vt-110602.html
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | and people who go to church aren't necessarily that much different from anybody else in life. We're all sinners. |
But only some are hypocrites. |
If atheists are critical of religion, does it really ban them from attendance of services and brand them as hypocrites when they do attend? For me it would be a sign of broad mindedness, to attend religious services, even when you are critical of it, or in spite of being critical of it. I see hypocricy as practising something different than what you are preaching. However, even when you preach something, you may wish to investigate what you are preaching, you may be concerned about your family or society, you may be under social pressure. You may happen to like the minister as well as his sermons and find personal value through attendance of the minister's sermons. Maybe being called a hypocrite could be unfair, as well as limiting? What do you think?
For example, if you do not agree with the politics of a right-wing organization, would that then make you a hypocrite to go to a gathering of that organization and listen to what its leaders have to say? Or would it make you broad minded to have enough of an open mind to investigate what they are talking about? ^ This is easy for me to agree on. So, NO. I do go to mass with my family, despite me being atheist. But I'm sure atheist conservatives (lol. I giggled coining that one) would beg to differ though.
Last edited by tingkagol on Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:40 am; edited 1 time in total
No. I am a strong atheist and I actually think that religion is dangerous and that we would be better off without it. So by going to church, I may not be helping the cause out but I a can still go without being a hypocrite. How? By going for a different reason. I am related to three pastors. I will go to church occasionally to support them because they're my family. I live in Southern California, USA. If I'm in Oklahoma, USA visiting my grandparents, then I will attend the church my grandfather pastors at. If I am in Ohio, USA visiting my sister and her husband, I will attend the church that my sister's husband pastors at. I don't ever see the other relative so that never comes up.
Also, I will do it simply to be nice to my parents sometimes. If I'm seeing my parents then I will sometimes agree to go to church with them (which is why I often avoid being in their house on Sunday) because they're my parents and they have done so much for me in my life that agreeing to waste away an hour of my life in order to make them feel very good is not too bad of a sacrifice on my part.
Sure I am critical of what is being said, and, in an appropriate time and manner, be outspoken against it, I will still go to church and I do not think that it makes me a hypocrite; it just makes me too nice of a relative...
If they say themselves as atheists than whats the point in attending a church if you think in terms of praying. But they are free to go anywhere they want. So, I can't say they are hypocrites.
You can only be a hypocrite if you lie. If you go to church, but don't claim to believe it, for whatever reason, that's not a lie. BUT, if you go to church, don't believe in it, and then make it out that you are 'holier than thou'... that would make you a hypocrite.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| You can only be a hypocrite if you lie. If you go to church, but don't claim to believe it, for whatever reason, that's not a lie. BUT, if you go to church, don't believe in it, and then make it out that you are 'holier than thou'... that would make you a hypocrite. |
Not sure whether I understand you right. Are you saying that if an atheist goes to church, even when he/she does not agree with religion, and act "holier than though" then that is being a hypocrite. But if a christian goes to church, and has the pretense of holier than though, then the christian is not a hypocrite?
Reminds me of the following poem by DH Lawrence of the very little difference there is between a worm that has turned and a worm, they will always be worms:
| Quote: |
Worm Either Way
If you live along with all the other people
and are just like them, and conform, and are nice
you're just a worm --
and if you live with all the other people
and you don't like them and won't be like them and won't conform
then you're just the worm that has turned,
in either case, a worm.
The conforming worm stays just inside the skin
respectably unseen, and cheerfully gnaws away at the heart of life,
making it all rotten inside.
The unconforming worm -- that is, the worm that has turned --
gnaws just the same, gnawing the substance out of life,
but he insists on gnawing a little hole in the social epidermis
and poking his head out and waving himself
and saying: Look at me, I am not respectable,
I do all the things the bourgeois daren't do,
I booze and fornicate and use foul language and despise your honest man.--
But why should the worm that has turned protest so much?
The bonnie bonnie bourgeois goes a-whoring up back streets just the same.
The busy busy bourgeois imbibes his little share
just the same
if not more.
The pretty pretty bourgeois pinks his language just as pink
if not pinker,
and in private boasts his exploits even louder, if you ask me,
than the other.
While as to honesty, Oh look where the money lies!
So I can't see where the worm that has turned puts anything over
the worm that is too cunning to turn.
On the contrary, he merely gives himself away.
The turned worm shouts. I bravely booze!
the other says. Have one with me!
The turned worm boasts: I copulate!
the unturned says: You look it.
You're a d----- b----- b----- p----- bb-----, says the worm that's turned.
Quite! says the other. Cuckoo!
|
Source: http://www.litera.co.uk/dh_lawrence_thoughts_on_religion/6/ | deanhills wrote: |
| Not sure whether I understand you right. Are you saying that if an atheist goes to church, even when he/she does not agree with religion, and act "holier than though" then that is being a hypocrite. But if a christian goes to church, and has the pretense of holier than though, then the christian is not a hypocrite? |
Alot of christians are hypocrites, so in that case- yes. But this is not about christians.
As for an atheist acting holier-than-thou while attending church, I don't really think that's hypocrisy. Is it? It's only pretense. But if he stands to "spiritually" benefit from say, praying, then I guess that's hypocrisy. I'm not really sure. (Anybody here care to argue semantics?)
On a side note: I think I'm a hypocrite. I pray once in a blue moon. To whom? I don't know. I'm not that strict in my atheistic principles, nor do I really care.Church as a social gathering will be fine
| deanhills wrote: |
Are you saying that if an atheist goes to church, even when he/she does not agree with religion, and act "holier than though" then that is being a hypocrite. But if a christian goes to church, and has the pretense of holier than though, then the christian is not a hypocrite?
|
Well, a Christian (a true one who really does do his best to obey God) might actually be 'holier than thou'... Making a big deal of that would mean he is pompous and overbearing, but not a hypocrite. (If he was a 'Christian' who didn't honestly try to obey God, and still acted like he was 'holier than thou', then yes, the Christian would be a hypocrite.)Hypocrisy in an atheist attending church is, as mentioned, contextual. There are many reasons to attend church, and spiritual salvation isn't always a top reason, even for Christians. It is a bit hypocritical to attend church, not believing, and pretending to believe. Attending church as a sociological activity (social solidarity is one of the primary functions of religious groups in societies) is no more hypocritical than going to a bar and not drinking. An atheist attending church for the experience or to observe is likewise not hypocritical, it's educational.
As mentioned, it's the lie that makes it hypocritical. It is possible to participate, being honest with yourself and those around you that you are just going through the motions, and not be a hypocrite.
I'm an atheist and I 'attend' churches and even cathedrals quite regularly.
Now, I happen to like Gothic architecture, so I happen to like many of our older churches and cathedrals on that score. Now I'm sure everyone would agree there is no question of hypocrisy there.
But, I also attend formal services occasionally. Weddings, funerals, etc. Now, I know the Catholic mass pretty well and I sometimes catch myself joining in with parts of it. Clearly that could be seen as me praying, which because of my public stance on prayer, would indeed make me a hypocrite IF I was praying in the belief, or even the hope, that it would have some supernatural effect. That would be textbook hypocrisy - publicly professing one belief or view, and privately following another opposed belief/view.
The thing is, though, that I find it hard to believe that a convinced atheist would really believe that the prayer actually did anything supernatural. With me it is more like a tune that goes round in your head - one which you don't really like, but can't stop humming. I also frequently join in with the hymns. Here I do it willingly and, often enthusiastically. I happen to like a lot of Catholic and C of E hymns. You have to go a long way to beat a packed 'house' belting out Jerusalem - very stirring stuff!
Of course I don't believe that I'm worshipping a God, despite the words - I just enjoy singing along to good tunes...
I even got married in Church. Now, how can I say that is not hypocritical? Easy. It was an unselfish act of generosity to my parents, my wife's parents and many of the relatives - Catholic every one. Those who knew me knew my views on religion. If some people inferred that I WAS religious, because of the Church wedding, then I certainly didn't set out to mislead them, so I think the charge of hypocrisy must fail again.
Now, the charge of 'liar' could certainly be made, since I don't believe the words in the Catholic wedding vow, yet I repeated them dutifully as if I did. I also promised the Priest (a few days before the ceremony*) that our children would be brought up 'in the Church' which was a sort of lie (we were both pretty clear that we didn't want kids, but if we HAD then I certainly would NOT have brought them up as Catholics).
*(This is standard operating procedure for Catholic weddings - especially when a Catholic marries a non-catholic. The priest organises a 'little talk' for the couple, during which his main aim is normally to extract the promise of a new generation of Catholics in the parish).
So, yes, religion does indeed sometimes make liars of some atheists, and I'm a case in point. I have absolutely no problems with my decision and I would do the same again in the circumstances. The only one 'damaged' was me, in that I had to lie and I had to sit through a service I didn't particularly like and certainly didn't want.
Dishonesty? Yep, guilty.
Hypocrisy? Nah....
@Chris. Really enjoyed your posting. Well written and has the makings of a good book in it. I appreciate your point of view as your point of view. From my own point of view I don't see it as either dishonest or hypocritical. This is real life that operates in opposites and dances in between facts and fiction all the time. Today's truth can easily become tomorrow's lie. We are made up of a million and one thoughts and seem to be changing all the time. Worst part would be if we stayed the same, as that has to be equal to stagnation. I don't think there are really any exactitudes in life, perhaps just one, we certainly are all going to die one day.
Bikerman, I always thought you were one of those staunch, outspoken atheists. I guess not. I can relate to your entire post. Liars we all are. 
I hide behind my Catholic veil as well. | tingkagol wrote: |
| Liars we all are. I hide behind my Catholic veil as well. |
Explain to me again, how saying you believe something you don't or that you'll do something you won't isn't hypocritical?
Sure, since you aren't ostentatiously claiming righteousness, you're not very hypocritical, but surely it is a little bit hypocritical to do/say these things? | ocalhoun wrote: |
| tingkagol wrote: | | Liars we all are. I hide behind my Catholic veil as well. |
Explain to me again, how saying you believe something you don't or that you'll do something you won't isn't hypocritical?
Sure, since you aren't ostentatiously claiming righteousness, you're not very hypocritical, but surely it is a little bit hypocritical to do/say these things? |
If you are open about it, then I can't see it being hypocritical. I neither see it as a lie. I see it as an inevitable personal conflict of a kind. We all have those. Your parents sort of got you into one way of thinking, and an imprint is made that even with changing cues later on, you still take comfort from in a symbolic way at times. Saying it as it is to me is a very honest statement. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| tingkagol wrote: | | Liars we all are. I hide behind my Catholic veil as well. |
Explain to me again, how saying you believe something you don't or that you'll do something you won't isn't hypocritical? |
I can see how one can see it as hypocritical. I'd say someone like me "pretending" to be christian in a predominantly christian world has its benefits. For one, people will stop bothering me.
When I say "pretend", I mean attending mass with my family (who are all catholic); or in the foreseeable future- getting married in church (just like Bikerman, girlfriend is a devout catholic), etc. I "pretend" because I want to be with my family and get involved in family activities, and because I want to grant my would-be christian spouse a church wedding, etc. This pretense is only to the extent of acting like the lax, near-excommunicated christian (which I see quite often nowadays). Normally I do not make the sign of the cross, take holy communion, and other rituals, but I'm willing to give exceptions to these as well, for instance- when I get married.
So yeah, maybe I am a hypocrite. But those things don't really bother me, nor does it change my views. To me the christian sacraments and other rituals are just like kissing under the mistletoe on christmas- I'd do it for the heck of it. I certainly do not feel guilty of hypocrisy. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| tingkagol wrote: | | Liars we all are. I hide behind my Catholic veil as well. |
Explain to me again, how saying you believe something you don't or that you'll do something you won't isn't hypocritical? |
OK - hypocrisy is more than just lying. It is misrepresenting yourself. The Collins dictionary in front of me offers
| Quote: |
| insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have. |
Now, as I said earlier, IF my intent, getting married in Church, had been to misrepresent my real views, and thus fool people into thinking I was religious, then that, I agree, would be text book hypocrisy.
An interesting question which arises from this scenario is: to what extent were the Catholics who attended the wedding ceremony hypocrites?
Now, these people certainly set out to portray themselves as Catholic, but, consider: to be a Catholic is to accept a set of doctrinal points which the Church holds as absolute. Thus, use of birth control, for example, is a sin. I wonder how many Catholics in the congregation routinely used birth control...Is that not rank hypocrisy?
Or, another example, I wonder how many of the congregation didn't really believe in transubstantiation, or other central articles of Catholic dogma, but still described themselves as part of the Church...Is that not hypocrisy?
PS - my wife isn't a devout Catholic, and wasn't when we got married. I'd say she was a 'social member' rather than a believer, though I have no wish or right to speak for her in this.
It was largely for the benefit of the relatives - though I'm pretty sure Caz enjoyed the ceremony more than I did (the whole idea of walking up the Church isle in a big dress seems to be something many women like). | tingkagol wrote: |
I can see how one can see it as hypocritical. I'd say someone like me "pretending" to be christian in a predominantly christian world has its benefits. For one, people will stop bothering me.
|
Hypocrisy may be frowned upon in society, but it does have benefits. ^.^
I'm a bit of a hypocrite myself, pretending to be normal in day-to-day life, but actually being a zoophile who would rather be a horse than human.
| Bikerman wrote: |
Now, as I said earlier, IF my intent, getting married in Church, had been to misrepresent my real views, and thus fool people into thinking I was religious, then that, I agree, would be text book hypocrisy.
|
Though it is on a small scale, wouldn't convincing the priest that you are Catholic be (small-scale) hypocrisy? As I said earlier, I'm hypocritical myself sometimes, so I don't condemn other hypocrites, at least not those who go about it in a limited fashion, and don't try to force their fake beliefs on others. A certain amount of hypocrisy is simply acceptable expediency in an intolerant society.
| Bikerman wrote: |
An interesting question which arises from this scenario is: to what extent were the Catholics who attended the wedding ceremony hypocrites? |
Oh, weekly church services are full of hypocrites who are religious only that one day of the week, and unrepentant sinners the other 6 days. I don't even mind them much; the only ones I can't stand are those hypocrites that pretend to be righteous and holier-than-thou, and then try to force you to do what they only pretend to do. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| tingkagol wrote: |
I can see how one can see it as hypocritical. I'd say someone like me "pretending" to be christian in a predominantly christian world has its benefits. For one, people will stop bothering me.
|
Hypocrisy may be frowned upon in society, but it does have benefits. ^.^ |
Exactly what I was saying. I know I benefit from the "pretense", that's why I can very well be accused of hypocrisy. Just wanted to point that out, anyway, carry on --- | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Though it is on a small scale, wouldn't convincing the priest that you are Catholic be (small-scale) hypocrisy? As I said earlier, I'm hypocritical myself sometimes, so I don't condemn other hypocrites, at least not those who go about it in a limited fashion, and don't try to force their fake beliefs on others. A certain amount of hypocrisy is simply acceptable expediency in an intolerant society. |
It is an interesting question. I think, on balance, not.
Look at it this way - if we define hypocrisy to mean misleading any other person, then most lies are, by definition, also acts of hypocrisy, since most lies misrepresent the liar to another person. I think hypocrisy has to be more - it has to be a more 'public' example of double standards.
As for convincing the priest that I was/am Catholic - well, by the Church's own definition I AM Catholic - baptised.
Last edited by Bikerman on Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:44 pm; edited 1 time in totalI've seen the light... God only exists if Man believes...
If you go to church, then you're in a building... you're not in God's presence... cos everywhere is God's presence... if you believe 
| medesignz wrote: |
I've seen the light... God only exists if Man believes...
If you go to church, then you're in a building... you're not in God's presence... cos everywhere is God's presence... if you believe |
Good point. Like beauty being in the eye of the beholder, probably ditto faith in God. | deanhills wrote: |
| medesignz wrote: | I've seen the light... God only exists if Man believes...
If you go to church, then you're in a building... you're not in God's presence... cos everywhere is God's presence... if you believe |
Good point. Like beauty being in the eye of the beholder, probably ditto faith in God. |
exactly. Its only sacred to those who believe | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Though it is on a small scale, wouldn't convincing the priest that you are Catholic be (small-scale) hypocrisy? |
It is not hypocritical to lie to an unjust authority. It is a morally justifiable act of defiance.
The atheist that lies to the priest to get married recognizes that the priest is acting unjustly in refusing to marry non-Catholics (it's just blatant discrimination, and the fact that it's sanctioned doesn't change that). They do not deserve to have their marriage denied, thus the priest does not deserve their respect. Or to put it another way, the priest is trying to harm them by denying them their marriage without any reasonable justification for doing so, so who cares about treating the priest with respect.Depends on meaning of atheist. As far as I know, they are not critical of religion if the religion is not forced upon them, if they are not harassed into it, and right to have own opinion and set of beliefs is not denied to them. How many times you have seen websites or forums that mention atheists without condemning or criticizing them?
By the way, I had possibility to see the textbook for studying atheism, when it was a legitimate course in some places. It was actually a history of major religions, reviewed with punctuality of school textbook on physics. And one had to memorize all of this in order to pass the exam 
.
In my humble opinion, atheists just do not have religious beliefs, or do not believe in existence of god(s) if you wish - this is last of their concerns, life is complicated enough even without that. As well they do not believe in fairies, unicorns and many others than they have no reason to believe in. (Trying to talk the individual into believing doesn't count, after all this is just skilled verbal exercise).
As life goes, one accumulates some experiences as a reason for beliefs: in the natural way things in life just can't go so bad without something influencing this outcome. Atheist becomes agnostic. Something superior may exist beyond the scope of our knowledge, but we can't know about this for sure.
As far as attending church is concerned, some visit them not in the time of services to admire art and architecture, it could be Catolic catedral with sculptures, eastern churches with paintings, or any other church open to general public.
During services, to take a peek at other peoples practices of believes, trying to understand world better.
If we are talking about not only visiting church but actually participating in worship, I've seen following reasons:
One, this became fashionable, you have a topic for appropriate conversation in society and rise in own eyes as a being highly spiritual only after few visits and talking about this, no other effort is required. Like compassion, help to less fortunate or weaker than you, being considerate, you can add more to this list. Several posts away was quote from His Holiness Dalai Lama about spirituality.
The second, as person ages it starts looking for insurance for well-being in area of unknown, so much talked about - afterlife. Or seek moral superiority AND authority either after starting attending religious services or by identifying themselves as being a vessel of the wisdom of ages (I'm not criticizing or implying that everybody does this with time. But some people did that, have personal experience with them).
People who have unsolvable problems and will grasp for any straw in futile hope that this helps. Oh, they sincerely pray and ask for the help of God, they are completely ready to become believers, but if only this helps. Some of them become believers, others stop after this didn't help too.
And let not forget that after being atheist one can actually develop religious beliefs. One of the early stages they may joke about it, masking confusion, but they go to the church to worship. Even religious people sometimes change the religion they belonged to by birth and upbringing.
Everybody is entitled to own opinion... Hypocrisy is accusing other men of being hypocrytes.
Christianity accusing someone of lies or hypocricy...now here's a joke of six milleniums.
As far as I'm concerned there's no such thing as hypocricy, there's your personal values that you can't bend and then there's that goal you absolutely need to reach. Whatever it takes is what I say, as long as you can live with yourself or die as yourself.
And that's me done with my little rant! =]
| The-Nisk wrote: |
As far as I'm concerned there's no such thing as hypocricy, there's your personal values that you can't bend and then there's that goal you absolutely need to reach. Whatever it takes is what I say, as long as you can live with yourself or die as yourself.
|
As long as you can live with yourself or die as yourself, eh?
Hypocrites are people who live under a mask, and die as someone else. | The-Nisk wrote: |
| As far as I'm concerned there's no such thing as hypocricy, there's your personal values that you can't bend and then there's that goal you absolutely need to reach. Whatever it takes is what I say, as long as you can live with yourself or die as yourself. |
If you can't see hypocricy, there is only one answer for it, you have to be an incredibly honest person. You're not a hypocrite. Maybe there is an element of dishonesty or sometimes self-delusion that has to be present for hypocricy to exist. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| The-Nisk wrote: |
As far as I'm concerned there's no such thing as hypocricy, there's your personal values that you can't bend and then there's that goal you absolutely need to reach. Whatever it takes is what I say, as long as you can live with yourself or die as yourself.
|
As long as you can live with yourself or die as yourself, eh?
Hypocrites are people who live under a mask, and die as someone else. |
Underneath any mask is a person, regardless of how much they wish their mask to be their true visage. And most of us will die as ourselves, it takes great courage to act out to the end. I would think many interesting things unfold in those last few moments. Besides, we don't neccesaraly have to choose to be defined as how others see us.
| deanhills wrote: |
If you can't see hypocricy, there is only one answer for it, you have to be an incredibly honest person. You're not a hypocrite. Maybe there is an element of dishonesty or sometimes self-delusion that has to be present for hypocricy to exist.
|
The only way I can uphold the virtue you so kindly bestowed upon me is if being honest about your dishonesty is honest? I don't see hypocricy because all I see is the intention behind it, if it's a device for survival (the type of survival you have to do when you finish work go home and have a long cold night ahead of you) or a method for reaching your goals, then it is merely that. As far as self-delusion goes, personaly I try to partake only when it can prove profitable to my condition. And I won't lie, that is still an problem. Whatever it takes.
But of course, if the good old mask of hypocricy is abused for shallow ends - I very much dislike it and the people who do so. | The-Nisk wrote: |
Underneath any mask is a person, regardless of how much they wish their mask to be their true visage. |
And some of those persons are hypocrites.
If you're living a lie, and especially if you expect others to act the same way you do, you are a hypocrite.
Instead of lofty-sounding blanket statements, let's use a more concrete example:
Person A goes to church every Sunday, and is (at least outwardly) extremely strict about 'doing the right thing even when nobody is looking'.
However, person A is having an affair with a woman he's not married to.
Person B is doing the same thing, and person A finds out about it.
Person A then loudly and publicly condemns person B for this immoral act, which makes person A a hypocrite. | The-Nisk wrote: |
| The only way I can uphold the virtue you so kindly bestowed upon me is if being honest about your dishonesty is honest? |
My motto too. If someone should say that he/she is an honest person, I would be suspicious, but if they said they aspire to being truthful, I would be more convinced. Honesty could be subjective at times, and what is honest for one person may be dishonest for another.
| The-Nisk wrote: |
| As far as self-delusion goes, personaly I try to partake only when it can prove profitable to my condition. And I won't lie, that is still an problem. Whatever it takes. |
I'm not sure whether self-delusion can be as intentional as you describe it to be, then it would not be a self-delusion anymore, but willful deception. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| The-Nisk wrote: |
Underneath any mask is a person, regardless of how much they wish their mask to be their true visage. |
And some of those persons are hypocrites.
If you're living a lie, and especially if you expect others to act the same way you do, you are a hypocrite. |
Just because you say so doesn't make it true. Same as with religion =]
| ocalhoun wrote: |
Instead of lofty-sounding blanket statements, let's use a more concrete example:
Person A goes to church every Sunday, and is (at least outwardly) extremely strict about 'doing the right thing even when nobody is looking'.
However, person A is having an affair with a woman he's not married to.
Person B is doing the same thing, and person A finds out about it.
Person A then loudly and publicly condemns person B for this immoral act, which makes person A a hypocrite. |
lofty-sounding blanket statements eh? Okay, let's look at your concrete example.
First off, I'm quite willing to believe there are a lot of people the likes of this 'person A' going to the church every sunday, but that aside. If you were having an affair with a woman you're not married to, would you casualy mention it in the conversation? I'm guessing neither A or B, nor the rest of alphabet did. I think what you're trying to do is convince me that there is such thing as hypocricy...while I'm trying to point out that we're all such liars and hypocrites that the very meaning of these words dissolves...didn't I mention that accusing another person of hypocricy is hypocricy in itself, in my very first addition to the topic?
There are very few pure people in the world, I'm lucky enough to have met a few to know the gravity of opposite.
| deanhills wrote: |
My motto too. If someone should say that he/she is an honest person, I would be suspicious, but if they said they aspire to being truthful, I would be more convinced. Honesty could be subjective at times, and what is honest for one person may be dishonest for another. |
Just to be clear - I am not saying I aspire to being truthful...I am saying that if there is any honesty in me I'm trying my best to keep it out of the way so that I can achieve what I want. And if that means lies and so called hypocricy, so be it.
| deanhills wrote: |
I'm not sure whether self-delusion can be as intentional as you describe it to be, then it would not be a self-delusion anymore, but willful deception.
|
In that case, willful deception it is! =] | The-Nisk wrote: |
...while I'm trying to point out that we're all such liars and hypocrites that the very meaning of these words dissolves...didn't I mention that accusing another person of hypocricy is hypocricy in itself, in my very first addition to the topic?
|
So, now we've gone from 'nobody is a hypocrite' to, 'everybody is a hypocrite'... I suppose that is closer to being accurate.
There are, however, those who are not hypocrites. Oddly enough, you find them at the very best and the very worst parts of society.
You have the people who truly are so good and honest that they have nothing to hide, and at the other end of the spectrum, you have people who are so rotten that it becomes pointless to try and hide it.
And, if I may, I'll throw in an extra problem into the works: I've never met a horse who acted hypocritically. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| The-Nisk wrote: | ...while I'm trying to point out that we're all such liars and hypocrites that the very meaning of these words dissolves...didn't I mention that accusing another person of hypocricy is hypocricy in itself, in my very first addition to the topic?
|
So, now we've gone from 'nobody is a hypocrite' to, 'everybody is a hypocrite'... I suppose that is closer to being accurate. |
No, I haven't crossed paths in what I said, if you failed to grip what I said in the very first post, not my fault, I was as accurate as I cared to be.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
And, if I may, I'll throw in an extra problem into the works: I've never met a horse who acted hypocritically. |
If you're making a comparison between the intelligence of an animal and a human in that statement, you're suceeding rather too much. Aside from that I don't know what you mean. | The-Nisk wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | The-Nisk wrote: | ...while I'm trying to point out that we're all such liars and hypocrites that the very meaning of these words dissolves...didn't I mention that accusing another person of hypocricy is hypocricy in itself, in my very first addition to the topic?
|
So, now we've gone from 'nobody is a hypocrite' to, 'everybody is a hypocrite'... I suppose that is closer to being accurate. |
No, I haven't crossed paths in what I said, if you failed to grip what I said in the very first post, not my fault, I was as accurate as I cared to be.
|
Apparently you didn't want to have much 'accuracy' at all...
Let's get it straight; please choose the one of these options that best suits your view on the subjet, or give me a different option, accurately:
-There are no hypocrites
-Everybody is a hypocrite
-Most people are hypocrites
-Some people are hypocrites
-Very few people are hypocrites
| Quote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: |
And, if I may, I'll throw in an extra problem into the works: I've never met a horse who acted hypocritically. |
If you're making a comparison between the intelligence of an animal and a human in that statement, you're suceeding rather too much. Aside from that I don't know what you mean. |
No, not making a comparison in intelligence, making a comparison in honesty.
It is a rather specious argument though, and I'll admit it's doubtful that they have the intelligence to commit hypocrisy. | The-Nisk wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: |
My motto too. If someone should say that he/she is an honest person, I would be suspicious, but if they said they aspire to being truthful, I would be more convinced. Honesty could be subjective at times, and what is honest for one person may be dishonest for another. |
Just to be clear - I am not saying I aspire to being truthful...I am saying that if there is any honesty in me I'm trying my best to keep it out of the way so that I can achieve what I want. And if that means lies and so called hypocricy, so be it. |
Thanks for the explanation. Think I get it. You try not to create hurdles out of truth, lack of truth, hypocricy or lies? Maybe you have a good point here for a more easy, guilt free and hazzle free living. Most of being a hypocrite is someone else's judgment anyway, or our own judgment of how we "ought" to live, and that has to be a tremendous waste of time. "Thinking" can turn into a handicap if we allow it to be.
