Just because I'm a hypocrite, doesn't make me wrong

[Marco Polo]

I think that all human beings should have a 400+ IQ, and everyone should be compassionate. Respectively, mine is a wee bit lower than that, and I can sometimes be disrespectful. That doesn't make my idea wrong. So whenever you have the urge to call someone a hypocrite, you still have to answer to the claims s/he is making.

What are your thoughts on this?

[sbdiane]

You've expressed an opinion. There is nothing hypocritical about having an opinion even if it is about something you are not capable of obtaining or doing. A hypocrite is a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives. Like a candidate in an election who puts up ads touting his environmental credentials to conceal the fact that he plans to get in office soley to be able to vote in favor of development projects that will benefit his own pocketbook.

[Elrond]

Disproving something on the basis that it is inconsistent with a persons actions is a logical fallacy, Ad Hominem Tu Quoque, alternatively "You Too Fallacy". So you're right.

[funchy]

If you judge others on not being intelligent and you're trying your best to be intelligent and well educated, that's one thing. But if you're choosing not to read books, learn, or pay attention, then you have no right to judge others.

You also mention compassion and disrespect. Do you try to be compassionate but sometimes make mistakes and be disrespectful, and you're working hard on improving? Or do you tell others to be compassionate but have a short temper and a foul mouth yourself? There's a big difference IMHO.

It's not wrong to make mistakes. It is wrong to judge others but not try to live up to those same standards.

[Buttercat Apocalypse]

Originally Posted by funchy

If you judge others on not being intelligent and you're trying your best to be intelligent and well educated, that's one thing. But if you're choosing not to read books, learn, or pay attention, then you have no right to judge others.

No one has any right to judge others. Let's leave it at that.

Judgement seems to be the unexpressed question, "why have you not asked me permission to exist?" F'uck that.

[Brutha]

I have also no problem with being hypocritical from time to time or reading people who are self professed hypocrits like Andrew Keen.

On the other hand authenticy is also very interesting.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by funchy

If you judge others on not being intelligent and you're trying your best to be intelligent and well educated, that's one thing. But if you're choosing not to read books, learn, or pay attention, then you have no right to judge others.

You also mention compassion and disrespect. Do you try to be compassionate but sometimes make mistakes and be disrespectful, and you're working hard on improving? Or do you tell others to be compassionate but have a short temper and a foul mouth yourself? There's a big difference IMHO.

It's not wrong to make mistakes. It is wrong to judge others but not try to live up to those same standards.

Marco Polo's concern is not with judging or blaming people, it seems, it is with discussing the truthfulness of something without being derailed by the possible fact that oneself is not living up to that truth.

For example, most smokers knows that smoking is bad for their health.

Jane: Smoking is bad for your health, and you should not smoke for that reason. Got a light?
Cain: How can you talk about the ill-effects of smoking and say that one shouldn’t smoke when your are a smoker yourself, and are still showing no signs of trying to quit?

Jane knows that smoking is bad for her, but continues to do so. She’s got her reasons, and her addictions are irrelevant when it comes to the discussion on whether or not people should smoke because it’s bad for their health.

What this whole thing ties in with is the ”you’re a fine one to talk”-argument, which really isn’t an argument at all. It’s something that most people might throw at you if you are trying to have a dialogue on some issue, and it turns out that you yourself are not living up to those ideals that you're talking about. It’s a nice and efficient way of devolving a discussion based on real arguments into a messy mud of personal attacks.

[dinc]

I am most definitely a hypocrite. I am unable to live up to my standards every day, especially in regards to sex and purity and such.

But who is? It is a very rare person who is able to live up to their own standards. We are all hypocrites. We are all trying. We all fail.

It would take a very stupid person to completely disregard another's suggestion just because the speaker doesn't follow it himself. It would also take a very stupid person to give such a suggestion undue credit.

Search for truth, and it will come to you. If you value the truth of something above all else, you will most likely make the right decision. If you let your own pride or timidity get in the way, you will most likely make the wrong decision.

[Parthon]

Originally Posted by Marco Polo

I think that all human beings should have a 400+ IQ, and everyone should be compassionate. Respectively, mine is a wee bit lower than that, and I can sometimes be disrespectful. That doesn't make my idea wrong. So whenever you have the urge to call someone a hypocrite, you still have to answer to the claims s/he is making.

What are your thoughts on this?

I declare war on the word "should" in this statement!

Now, if you mean it would be great, and that it could be posible one day, and it's what people can strive for, then awesome. But people don't have to "should" anything if they don't want to.

Like what Elrond said though, you can have high ideals for yourself and humanity, you can try and live up to them and sometimes you will fail. When you fail you may look like a hypocrite, but that's all part of being human. If we were all perfect we wouldn't be able to grow, experience and enjoy life. If we were all the same we'd be boring and bored of each other and there's be no expression in the world. If we didn't have high ideals and the capacity to reach for them, we'd be slothful animals just living the same routine out every day.

The ability to be a hypocrite and to strive is unique to humans and is the best part of humanity. The fact people can stand at the altar and say "I will love, chrish and obey you forever." then not do that, is completely awesome. We want to be our best, and that's the challenge of being human.

Ps. I'm a massive hypocrite. I love personal development and being true to what counts, but I skipped work to go to a wedding last night. That's not very positive at all. :P

[CroMagna]

Originally Posted by Marco Polo

I think that all human beings should have a 400+ IQ, and everyone should be compassionate. Respectively, mine is a wee bit lower than that, and I can sometimes be disrespectful. That doesn't make my idea wrong. So whenever you have the urge to call someone a hypocrite, you still have to answer to the claims s/he is making.

What are your thoughts on this?

I think hypocrites are just awful, especially religious ones.

[dinc]

Originally Posted by CroMagna

I think hypocrites are just awful, especially religious ones.

Religious people are 'hypocrites' by definition, or at least Christians are. It is written dogma that they will never be perfect, yet they should strive for it and encourage others to do so.