Is a hypocrite all bad?

Does not by being one mean you have learned something different and greater?

Are we not all hypocrites unless we have all learned all there is to be complete?


And going from the assertion that no one person can be complete, becasue we must always learn change evolve into something new and different (something more the same) mean that we are all hypocrites, unless we stop learning?

Perhaps the only non-hypocrites are the dead or retarded?

Is a hypocrite all bad?

Does not by being one mean you have learned something different and greater?

Are we not all hypocrites unless we have all learned all there is to be complete?

a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess,esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

And going from the assertion that no one person can be complete, becasue we must always learn change evolve into something new and different (something more the same) mean that we are all hypocrites, unless we stop learning?

Perhaps the only non-hypocrites are the dead or retarded?

Pyrrho;
Dont we all pretend in some manner or other all of the time?

So you are saying there is a way to become more honest? no less dishonest?

What about the hypercrites? Those who commit to their role so thoroughly that they forget that "all the world's a stage". That way lies madness. The hypercrites overshoot the mark. They don't know how to be merely authentic. They strive for some unattainable super-authenticity.

There must be some middle way between these two extremes; there must be a way to be neither a hypocrite nor a hypercrite.

I am a crite.

This is great. Some never take the mask off and others forget they are wearing one. We slide between the plus sign and the negative sign.

Also like the "crite." Thesis-antithesis-synthesis? Devil take the foremost?

It is a question of equilibrium which I think is fundamentally different from the synthesis that is the negation of the negation. That's an interesting thread idea: "synthesis vs. equilibrium". Is that Hegel vs. Aristotle?

Is a hypocrite all bad?

Does not by being one mean you have learned something different and greater?

Are we not all hypocrites unless we have all learned all there is to be complete?


And going from the assertion that no one person can be complete, becasue we must always learn change evolve into something new and different (something more the same) mean that we are all hypocrites, unless we stop learning?

Perhaps the only non-hypocrites are the dead or retarded?

Sadly, none of the plays of Hypocrites (c. 480-420 BC) have survived.

Being a hypocrite is bad. It may, however, be better than actually doing what one claims to believe, if one claims to believe very bad things. But it would be better to be honest and not claim to believe such bad things.

Being a hypocrite is a form of dishonesty.

All hypocrites until all are living, believing, honestly the facts and the truth.

I am tempted to just say "no", but instead I will ask, what do you mean, and why would you suppose that people always pretend?

If one is a male politician who picks up men in airports to have sex with them, one can avoid being rampantly anti-homosexual in one's public pronouncements. And that is all it would take to avoid hypocrisy about that issue; keeping one's mouth shut about the issue would be all that it would take.

It is all a question of honesty, and some people are honest, while some are very dishonest, and many are honest much of the time, but not all of it. You may have noticed different levels of honesty in other people. Some people are very hypocritical, while others are not. If all of the people you know are a bunch of lying hypocrites, I suggest you make some new acquaintances, and select them differently from the way you have selected the people you know.

Why would you think that all hypocrites don't think they are hypocrites? (If that is what you happen to mean). Many of them do.

What about the hypercrites? Those who commit to their role so thoroughly that they forget that "all the world's a stage". That way lies madness. The hypercrites overshoot the mark. They don't know how to be merely authentic. They strive for some unattainable super-authenticity.

There must be some middle way between these two extremes; there must be a way to be neither a hypocrite nor a hypercrite.

I am a crite.

- Charles Baudelaire




You know it, my reader, my delicate monster,
Hypocrite reader, my self, my brother.


(Les Fleurs de Mal)

How do you know that is sad?

a hypocrite is a person that refuses to recognize the condition about them self that when recognized and moved on past can allow them to grow and find the truth about who/what they are. It is basically an impediment. What you do not realize is that you are complete and always have been. you are just lost in your own creations about what you think you are and not what you really are. you will find your completeness when you are finished playing in this universe and are ready to return to the source of your existence.

Is a hypocrite all bad?

Does not by being one mean you have learned something different and greater?

Are we not all hypocrites unless we have all learned all there is to be complete?


And going from the assertion that no one person can be complete, becasue we must always learn change evolve into something new and different (something more the same) mean that we are all hypocrites, unless we stop learning?

Perhaps the only non-hypocrites are the dead or retarded?