Access to the full content is only available to members of institutions that have purchased access. If you belong to such an institution, please log in or find out more about how to order.


Print

Contents

NEW
|

Moral hypocrisy

DOI
10.4324/9780415249126-L152-1
Published
2020
DOI: 10.4324/9780415249126-L152-1
Version: v1,  Published online: 2020
Retrieved October 01, 2020, from https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/moral-hypocrisy/v-1

Article Summary

The term ‘hypocrisy’ is said to derive from the Greek words ‘hupokrasis’ and ‘hupokrinesthai’, the former meaning ‘acting a part’, and the latter meaning ‘to act on a stage’. The element of play-acting reflects how the phenomenon of moral hypocrisy is commonly understood within philosophy. According to one long-standing tradition, hypocrites are those who advocate moral principles that do not reflect their underlying commitments, and who do so in order to mislead or manipulate others. A second tradition parts ways from the long-standing association between hypocrisy and pretence, however, and understands hypocrisy primarily in terms of exception-seeking. The latter family of views takes hypocrites to be those who apply moral standards to others that they do not apply to themselves. The different elements of hypocrisy that each tradition emphasises is a testament to the multifaceted nature of the phenomenon, whose complexity raises a host of philosophical questions. Among those questions that have attracted the attention of philosophers are whether hypocrisy must be intentional, what explains its moral undesirability, and whether it is always criticisable.

Print
Citing this article:
Isserow, Jessica. Moral hypocrisy, 2020, doi:10.4324/9780415249126-L152-1. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/moral-hypocrisy/v-1.
Copyright © 1998-2020 Routledge.

Related Articles