I don't consider it one of the "weakest ones" and I often find that people trying to argue against hypocrisy are extremely low credibility, it means they don't care about contradictions in what they advocate to others, which is such a foundational property that I think anyone reasonable would have it -- it's not about some inverted argument from authority.
The central example is obviously something more like people taking a pseudo-neutral stance of a rule while applying it only one way in practice, or politicians saying something in public and doing the opposite privately. It is so useful that you could not discard it and I view it with suspicion when someone attempts to call it weak or dismantle it.
I don't consider it one of the "weakest ones" and I often find that people trying to argue against hypocrisy are extremely low credibility, it means they don't care about contradictions in what they advocate to others, which is such a foundational property that I think anyone reasonable would have it -- it's not about some inverted argument from authority.
The central example is obviously something more like people taking a pseudo-neutral stance of a rule while applying it only one way in practice, or politicians saying something in public and doing the opposite privately. It is so useful that you could not discard it and I view it with suspicion when someone attempts to call it weak or dismantle it.
More options
Context Copy link