Hypocracy

[Clueless Git]

Question, bit of a convuluted one, spawned from the "How to Answer 'Those' Questions" topic ...

Defining hypocracy as; "The practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform".

Q1: If a person admits to not being able to conform to the moral standards they claim to believe in is that still hypocracy?

E.g. If an omni admits to believing unnecesary animal cruelty to be wrong BUT also admits to not being able to live up to that standard (dietarily) is he/she still a hypocrit?

Q2: Is a veg*an (on the assumption that veg*nism see's speciesm as moraly wrong) a hypocrit if they see a greater wrong in, say, the beating of one of their own species than they see in the killing of one of another species?

 

[KLS52]

It's Wikipedia and early in the morning and I have no idea if this is relevant, but it kind of makes sense to me at the moment...

"Hypocrisy is not simply failing to practice those virtues that one preaches. Samuel Johnson made this point when he wrote about the misuse of the charge of "hypocrisy" in Rambler No. 14:

Nothing is more unjust, however common, than to charge with hypocrisy him that expresses zeal for those virtues which he neglects to practice; since he may be sincerely convinced of the advantages of conquering his passions, without having yet obtained the victory, as a man may be confident of the advantages of a voyage, or a journey, without having courage or industry to undertake it, and may honestly recommend to others, those attempts which he neglects himself.[2]
Thus, an alcoholic's advocating temperance, for example, would not be considered an act of hypocrisy as long as the alcoholic made no pretense of sobriety."


Sent from my iPhone

 

[Clueless Git]

As cool a quote as I ever seen there, KLS

Am I alone in thinking that it kinda means that only denial of a hypocracy is actualy a hypocracy?

 

[Second Summer]

Good quote, KLS!

Q2: Is a veg*an (on the assumption that veg*nism see's speciesm as moraly wrong) a hypocrit if they see a greater wrong in, say, the beating of one of their own species than they see in the killing of one of another species?

Probably, but I don't agree with the assumption, since veg*ism in itself doesn't have any doctrines relating to specieism.

 

[KLS52]

Yeah, I knew it was risky...a little too 'deep' for me. But I was feeling all rebel-like that morning, lol.

 

[Clueless Git]

Good quote, KLS!

Probably, but I don't agree with the assumption, since veg*ism in itself doesn't have any doctrines relating to specieism.

Is veganism not inherently non-speciest, do you think, IS?

I'm thinking like; How would/could a vegan do something speceist without broaching one (or more) of the defined 'doctrines' (would prefer 'principles) that defines veganism?

 

[Second Summer]

Is veganism not inherently non-speciest, do you think, IS?

No. Anti-specieism is perhaps inherent in AR philosophy, or at least some AR philosophy, but not in veganism.

I'm thinking like; How would/could a vegan do something speceist without broaching one (or more) of the defined 'doctrines' (would prefer 'principles) that defines veganism?

I'm thinking vegans will hold animal life in high regard, but may hold human life in an even higher regard, thereby being guilty of specieism. So any time I treat a human better than any other animal, solely based on their group membership, it's an instance of specieism. Concrete examples are difficult I think, as humans and other animals have different needs. But let's say I were a student and made a choice to study human diseases and cures rather than diseases and cures for other animals, because I hold humans in higher regard, then I think that would be an example of specieism.