Moral Cowardice vs. Hypocrisy

[chriscase]

Define:
Moral cowardice: the manufacture of ideology or arguments that provide justification of an immoral act. For example, a rapist who creates a mythology about how all his victims "really wanted it."

Hypocrisy: immoral behavior in contradiction of held beliefs. For example, a rapist who freely admits rape is wrong, but who does it anyway because he wants to.

Which is preferable?

In both cases, the action is wrong, but the moral coward is also dishonest about the morality of his actions. At least the hypocrite is right about how he should act.

[Stalins Ghost]

Hypocrisy. Moral cowardice stands a chance of creating a precedent, where hypocrisy makes the party in question clearly in the wrong.

[chriscase]

Hypocrisy. Moral cowardice stands a chance of creating a precedent, where hypocrisy makes the party in question clearly in the wrong.

I agree. And yet, it seems to me that we are so outspoken against hypocrisy, and hold it up to such ridicule, that we actually encourage moral cowardice.

[Bokks]

I agree. And yet, it seems to me that we are so outspoken against hypocrisy, and hold it up to such ridicule, that we actually encourage moral cowardice.

How so? Is there a specific example that you are thinking of?

[chriscase]

How so? Is there a specific example that you are thinking of?

Of course, there are lots of specific examples one could think of in the world of politics especially.

But I think more on the small scale, we tend to make up stories that support the way we live. For example, in another thread on this site, there is discussion of whether pornography is immoral. I know from conversations with other men that it is hard for a man who enjoys pornography to admit it might be morally wrong. Another example - I have known a number of starving student types who espoused popularist, quasi-leftist ideas, until they got good jobs and started making real money.

My preference in this case is to be honest - if you like porn and want to watch it, regardless of its morality - then just do it. Don't jump through ideological hoops trying to make it right. Similarly, if you believe the class divisions are unfair, don't change your mind just because you happen to have landed a good job. One should at least have the integrity of one's beliefs, regardless of whether one actually puts them into practice.

[bspiken]

I agree, however I thought that hypocrisy was the act of preaching something and doing something else.

Example: A priest who secretly rapes kids.

I think the other one is cynism.

Example:
Person A: You know that smoking is wrong.
Person B: I know, but I dont let that stop me.
Person A: You are so cynical.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Person A: You know that smoking is wrong.
Person B: I know, but I dont let that stop me.
Person A: You are so cynical.

It depends. One who constantly emphasizes his abstinence and then is caught smoking is a hypocrite, definetely.

I prefer a hypocrite to a morally coward.

[Bokks]

@chriscase, sorry I didn't respond earlier, I completely forgot about all threads in the ethos (darn arcade we have here!)
I agree with you (porn and consumerism aside) but it seems like it's not so much moral cowardice as it is moral modification. You used integrity, I think that's a perfect word. For the smoker I suppose it could be moral cowardice, or a physical weakness, but I don't really see the person that strikes it rich as a hypocrit or a coward. Moron, probably, and lacking real integrity, but if they made it big and then complained about everyone else not doing their part to help the needy or save the environment as they fly private jets and seclude themselves from the world (wow, I didn't mean to make an analogy of Al Gore, but it seems to fit...) then you'd have a hypocrit.
The assertion though, that hypocracy breeds cowardise (oh, I forget if you said that or not, i think you did) I think think is head on.

It depends. One who constantly emphasizes his abstinence and then is caught smoking is a hypocrite, definetely.

I prefer a hypocrite to a morally coward.

They seem to go hand in hand, if you have one you have the other.
Personally hypocrits just drive me nuts, though.

[Romulus_A]

Hmm, hard decision, after all, both sides are more than likely lying.

I guess it would depend on the situation, for example, a hypocrite who shows genuine remorse is what I prefer, but if a hypocrite is merely saying the act he commited is wrong in order to get out of something, then I don't think he is any better than the moral coward.

Just as well, I find it hard to believe any hypocrite who freely admits what he did was wrong, or else, why would he have done it in the first place? Of course, they can plead insanity, as most do these days, but I also find it hard to believe that this insanity is so convenient that it doesn't plague them when they're being prosecuted.

But in the case of moral cowards, they're creating false images of the immoral acts they commited, which doesn't make them any better.

Using your example of the rapist though, if the rapist truly thought that these people "wanted it" then that would mean that in his eyes, it wasn't rape. He's either lying to himself or to the accuser, quite similar to a hypocrite.

Basically what I'm trying to convey, is that a hypocrite and a moral coward are almost one in the same in most cases, they are both usually lying to another person, or themself. If there is any difference between them, it's a very thin line.

But I'm rambling...

If I were to choose from either of these almost one-in-the-same sides, it would be the hypocrite, because at least he's not making any excuses.

[Felixion]

Morals are entirely relative to the person we're talking about. Can you go and rape a kitten with your right hand while you spray-paint a pre-school with the other? No. Can I? Yes. Have I? I'm writing this from the library at my state penitentiary .

[Eksadiss]

Define:
Moral cowardice: the manufacture of ideology or arguments that provide justification of an immoral act. For example, a rapist who creates a mythology about how all his victims "really wanted it."

Do you mean immoral by dictionary definition? or immoral in some religious sense.

Also, If someone develops an ideology and as a result, "immoral" acts become permitted, how is it cowardice?

If it is cowardice, wouldn't that make a large number of power religions cowardice?

[chriscase]

Do you mean immoral by dictionary definition? or immoral in some religious sense.

In order to eliminate arguments about whether the justifications supplied by the moral coward are valid, I tried to frame the action as strictly wrong, even according to the perpetrator's underlying value system. That's why the the rapist who wants to justify his actions might make up a story about how his victim "really wanted it." The idea is that the victim really didn't "want it," but the rapist invents a fictional desire because he knows that rape is wrong.

Also, If someone develops an ideology and as a result, "immoral" acts become permitted, how is it cowardice?

I see it as cowardice because the overriding motive seems to be the unwillingness of the perpetrator to face the wrongness of his own actions. I admit this may be a non-standard definition of moral cowardice, but I couldn't think of a better term for it. That's why I tried to lay out a fairly strict definition at the outset of the discussion.

If it is cowardice, wouldn't that make a large number of power religions cowardice?

I'm not sure about that. Religious ideology seems to evolve over time. I'm not sure we could pinpoint a specific change in religious ideology that could be clearly linked to a set of behaviors that previously violated doctrine and subsequently did not. I would guess this has happened often, but I can't think of any really good examples off the top of my head.

I wonder if the practices of the Spanish Inquisition could be seen in this category. I just don't know enough about them to say.

[Thanatos]

I want the hypocrite.