Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is this considered hypocricy?

  1. May 1, 2005 #1


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Ok what is this considered as...

    You have 2 groups. Group A gets mad and publically complains about something group B did and tries to brush it off as 'ok'. Then later, group B gets mad for Group A doing the same thing but they also try to brush it off as 'ok'.

    Is it right for any side to claim the other sides hypocritical? Is there a "first use" rule or osmething like that? Yah dumb question but im bored :D
  2. jcsd
  3. May 2, 2005 #2
    it would hypocritical to hold 'ourselves' to different standards than we hold 'others', so yes
  4. May 2, 2005 #3


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    But can anyone be considered hypocritical? Isnt side A hypocritical because they did the same thing they were mad about in teh past.... but along with that, isnt side B hypocritical for trying getting mad because they thought it was ok teh first time they did it... is there a first rule? lol. Seems like in politics you see this situation a lot.
  5. May 2, 2005 #4
    From Group C's point of view both groups are just a bunch of idiots :-)
  6. May 2, 2005 #5
    Sounds like every Real World episode I've ever seen, which is far too many.
    This question is actually more complex than it appears. At first glance I would agree with fourier jr. We should hold ourselves to the same standards we expect others to uphold.

    The rules change if there is competition involved. If the other person is using an underhanded technique that puts you at a disadvantage then you have to weigh which is more important, maintaining moral beliefs or winning. Sometimes resorting to similar techniques isn't worth the sacrafice to personal integrity. Sometimes losing means embarrassment. It can even threaten control of resources vital to survival.

    Evolution favors prejudice. The versatile survive and those that cannot, or refuse to adapt, will die. Morals are strange things, aren't they?

    I think it is hypocrisy any way you look at it.
    Last edited: May 2, 2005
  7. May 2, 2005 #6
    There is, of course, also a genetic basis for morality. It's not always to your advantage to fight dirty. If other people see you do it and they have a code of honor, then you could be in trouble.
  8. May 2, 2005 #7
    I'm not sure that is genetic. I think of it as a social construct. You are right though, there can be penalties to fighting dirty if you are outnumbered, or lack authority. If they are unwilling to fight dirty then you will have an advantage over them too. If there is nobody that will stop you then you can do whatever you like without consequences. That wouldn't be much of a society at all. Maybe that's why we developed morals and the dichotomy is why we ask questions about them.
  9. May 2, 2005 #8
    We have a culture and evolve with the culture. Morality is genetic in large part, and also cultural.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook