3 ms·

Hypocrisy comes from the Greek word for pretending or acting. You don't usually listen to hypocrites on an issue, because they lack the character to have a vali

Hypocrisy comes from the Greek word for pretending or acting. You don't usually listen to hypocrites on an issue, because they lack the character to have a valid stance on the issue. If a murderer kills someone and then says murder is bad, we know they're full of crap and don't actually believe murder is bad, they're simply saying that to appear remorseful and less guilty.. In this situation Buzzfeed is pretending that this tracking is bad to generate more clicks so that their ads can invade more privacy to generate more income, exactly like Facebook. If they actually thought it was bad, their business model wouldn't rely upon it. Only suckers believe Buzzfeed actually thinks this is bad.

BeetleB 8y ago
>we know they're full of crap and don't actually believe murder is bad, they're simply saying that to appear remorseful and less guilty. Actually, no. The world is full of people who do bad things while believing they are bad. For example, I engage in a lot of practices that I think are harmful for the environment. I buy food that I suspect/believe is causing the environment harm. I buy products made with packaging that I believe causes harm. But I'm still openly against those practices. And if a ballot measure comes up to ban products involving those practices in my city/state/country, I'll vote for it. There's no inconsistency here. The notion that one is required to practice what they preach is a flawed one. Knowledge and practice are orthogonal. People do bad things because they get value out of them. Knowing it is wrong doesn't suddenly reduce the value one gets from them. My food tastes the same regardless of my knowledge on the harm it does to the environment.
clucas 8y ago
I think it's important to acclaim arguments against bad behavior, even when made by people who are doing that same bad behavior. (1) Having good arguments out in the world is a good thing. (2) Positive feedback tends to reinforce behavior - and we want to reinforce news orgs making good arguments against bad behavior. (3) After you have acclaimed their argument, it's much more effective when you use it against them. If you just constantly snipe at people and organizations, I think it becomes much harder to effect change. In "Phaedo," Plato has Socrates give a lesson about misology - that is, hating all reasoning and arguments, and assuming they are bad because you can always find flaws and it's so difficult to reach certainty. It's the intellectual version of misanthropy. Socrates cautions strongly against misology. Just because there are problems with an argument, doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to try to improve and take the good parts from every argument we can find, no matter how flawed the other parts (or the speaker) are. I think this is an important lesson in these times. I think we should stop fighting over whether a person or organization is allowed to say certain things, and concentrate on what parts of what they say should change our behavior.
- merpnderp 8y ago
  I agree with most of what you say. But Socrates not only spoke of Logos he spoke of Ethos and Kairos. Bad people making good statements can often weaken an argument because no one wants to associated with lying aholes. I’m sure Hitler said something good about something, but I’m sure as hell not using his arguments.
  - tripzilch 8y ago
    > I’m sure Hitler said something good about something, but I’m sure as hell not using his arguments. That's ridiculous. If Hitler once made a good argument about something, that doesn't invalidate usage of that same argument by other people. I mean really. I can't even think of a hypothetical example where that would make sense. And Hitler fucking sucked, fuck that guy.
rhizome 8y ago
If a murderer kills someone and then says murder is bad, we know they're full of crap Only if we already know they've murdered someone before they advocate against murder. Until we do find out, the murderer appears the same as anybody else, despite being a hypocrite.

BeetleB 8y ago

>we know they're full of crap and don't actually believe murder is bad, they're simply saying that to appear remorseful and less guilty. Actually, no. The world is full of people who do bad things while believing they are bad. For example, I engage in a lot of practices that I think are harmful for the environment. I buy food that I suspect/believe is causing the environment harm. I buy products made with packaging that I believe causes harm. But I'm still openly against those practices. And if a ballot measure comes up to ban products involving those practices in my city/state/country, I'll vote for it. There's no inconsistency here. The notion that one is required to practice what they preach is a flawed one. Knowledge and practice are orthogonal. People do bad things because they get value out of them. Knowing it is wrong doesn't suddenly reduce the value one gets from them. My food tastes the same regardless of my knowledge on the harm it does to the environment.

clucas 8y ago

I think it's important to acclaim arguments against bad behavior, even when made by people who are doing that same bad behavior. (1) Having good arguments out in the world is a good thing. (2) Positive feedback tends to reinforce behavior - and we want to reinforce news orgs making good arguments against bad behavior. (3) After you have acclaimed their argument, it's much more effective when you use it against them. If you just constantly snipe at people and organizations, I think it becomes much harder to effect change. In "Phaedo," Plato has Socrates give a lesson about misology - that is, hating all reasoning and arguments, and assuming they are bad because you can always find flaws and it's so difficult to reach certainty. It's the intellectual version of misanthropy. Socrates cautions strongly against misology. Just because there are problems with an argument, doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to try to improve and take the good parts from every argument we can find, no matter how flawed the other parts (or the speaker) are. I think this is an important lesson in these times. I think we should stop fighting over whether a person or organization is allowed to say certain things, and concentrate on what parts of what they say should change our behavior.

merpnderp 8y ago
I agree with most of what you say. But Socrates not only spoke of Logos he spoke of Ethos and Kairos. Bad people making good statements can often weaken an argument because no one wants to associated with lying aholes. I’m sure Hitler said something good about something, but I’m sure as hell not using his arguments.
- tripzilch 8y ago
  > I’m sure Hitler said something good about something, but I’m sure as hell not using his arguments. That's ridiculous. If Hitler once made a good argument about something, that doesn't invalidate usage of that same argument by other people. I mean really. I can't even think of a hypothetical example where that would make sense. And Hitler fucking sucked, fuck that guy.

rhizome 8y ago

If a murderer kills someone and then says murder is bad, we know they're full of crap Only if we already know they've murdered someone before they advocate against murder. Until we do find out, the murderer appears the same as anybody else, despite being a hypocrite.