Have you ever heard the phrase "do as I say, not as I do"? This phrase is often used when one is caught committing an act that they have previously put down. I find it disturbing that the phrase is so common, because it means that many many people are hypocrites to their own causes.
For example, I've observed situations before in which a parent lights a cigarette, while simultaneously disapproving of the action with their children, claiming to know better and that the entire act is wrong. Now I'm no advocate to smoking, but it shouldn't be the case that the current smoker tells a non-smoker not to smoke. It just shouldn't work that way, and most of the time doesn't. Studies have shown that a non-smoking parent who teaches their kid of the errors of cigarettes has a greater chance of their child being a non-smoker than a smoking parent who claims has personal experience on the subject and disapproves of smoking. It's just that simple; hypocrisy isn't trustworthy.
All that being said, I think we should hold ourselves accountable for the hypocritical things we do. Even knowing this, I find myself acting in opposition of the values I uphold. But the point is, we should do our best to keep our ideals straight, and to not act in blatant disregard. However, in doing so, we must not become so close-minded that we fail to recognize other points of view as possible, because we are just shifting to an extreme, and living life in extremes is easy; learning how to maintain a balance is the difficult thing to do.
All in all, to battle and understand hypocrisy, we must understand that most people act on a situational basis, disobeying ideals for the moment to carry out behaviors that contradict them. While this isn't a cut and dry issue, I think our behaviors should match our ideals, however you see fit to do so. If you wish to form your beliefs around the way you act, go for it. If you want to choose a set of ideas to abide by, reform your behavior and maintain it. Either way, you will be avoiding hypocrisy, and you will most likely find that you are peaceful in the knowledge that you choose your actions or basis for actions; they don't choose you.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Saturday, March 13, 2010
What if...
Ok, bear with me here.
Imagine a world where everyone is held to a higher standard. Every man and woman looks out for one another, simply for the greater good of every other person; every child is taught to value everything about a person, and are swayed from common hypocrisies in favor of focus on variation as a positive.
We would combine the world into one nation, by the people of Earth, for the people of Earth, and the World is regulated by a government that receives no pay. Everyone is allowed to vote on all bills, on every single election. This leaves less room for corruption and enables the people to directly affect their world. The ability to vote on such issues is made easily accessible, so that anyone may vote publicly or privately, based on preference, through public stations or wristwatch-like devices. Both test for DNA authenticity, as well as other factors of identification, in order to vote effectively. There would be little need to rig or sway political elections, as the politicians would have notably less power and would lack paychecks. These people would lead out of sheer recognition of the need for a leader, which would lead to highly intelligent representatives. There would be no parties; this only distracts from the traits of the individual, who would be held to the highest standards.
All healthcare in this world would be provided at legitimate prices, without overinflated "bs" to overcharge customers. With increases in technological advancement, the jobs of doctors and medical professionals will become less strenuous, and therefore this would be possible.
Education would be viewed as the priority; children would be placed according to their likes and dislikes, and would be set on a track towards improving their happiness over a lifetime, contrary to the system today in which many see their happiest days as kids and teenagers. So many more things could be achieved, if only we had the desire, and we would fight for it (verbally of course).
I can foresee all of these things happening fairly soon. Their limitations will become irrelevant in the near future due to advances in technology, and the opportunity for worldwide happiness will be on the horizon. Will we take that chance? Who knows. But I can tell you one thing: If we don't stop forcing people to jump on the bandwagon, or we don't stop treating others as though they are merely here to hinder our success, we won't make it to this future. Just some food for thought, I may be ranting, but I just had a vision of such a bright future that I thought I would share it.
Imagine a world where everyone is held to a higher standard. Every man and woman looks out for one another, simply for the greater good of every other person; every child is taught to value everything about a person, and are swayed from common hypocrisies in favor of focus on variation as a positive.
We would combine the world into one nation, by the people of Earth, for the people of Earth, and the World is regulated by a government that receives no pay. Everyone is allowed to vote on all bills, on every single election. This leaves less room for corruption and enables the people to directly affect their world. The ability to vote on such issues is made easily accessible, so that anyone may vote publicly or privately, based on preference, through public stations or wristwatch-like devices. Both test for DNA authenticity, as well as other factors of identification, in order to vote effectively. There would be little need to rig or sway political elections, as the politicians would have notably less power and would lack paychecks. These people would lead out of sheer recognition of the need for a leader, which would lead to highly intelligent representatives. There would be no parties; this only distracts from the traits of the individual, who would be held to the highest standards.
All healthcare in this world would be provided at legitimate prices, without overinflated "bs" to overcharge customers. With increases in technological advancement, the jobs of doctors and medical professionals will become less strenuous, and therefore this would be possible.
Education would be viewed as the priority; children would be placed according to their likes and dislikes, and would be set on a track towards improving their happiness over a lifetime, contrary to the system today in which many see their happiest days as kids and teenagers. So many more things could be achieved, if only we had the desire, and we would fight for it (verbally of course).
I can foresee all of these things happening fairly soon. Their limitations will become irrelevant in the near future due to advances in technology, and the opportunity for worldwide happiness will be on the horizon. Will we take that chance? Who knows. But I can tell you one thing: If we don't stop forcing people to jump on the bandwagon, or we don't stop treating others as though they are merely here to hinder our success, we won't make it to this future. Just some food for thought, I may be ranting, but I just had a vision of such a bright future that I thought I would share it.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
You're wrong! *Lalalalalalala* I'm not listening!
You're wrong. I'm right. End of story. Queue 15 minute conversation. You're
still wrong, I'm still right, and we're both angry at each other. What have we
solved? Too often this is the way things go when having a conversation/debate.
One or both of the parties involved will stay completely firm in their
argument, giving no room whatsoever for open-mindedness, and turning a blind
eye to the only way to learn. By rejecting even the idea of being wrong, the stubborn
person has denied logic and reason. In denying the possibility, they have shown
that they are overly prideful.
still wrong, I'm still right, and we're both angry at each other. What have we
solved? Too often this is the way things go when having a conversation/debate.
One or both of the parties involved will stay completely firm in their
argument, giving no room whatsoever for open-mindedness, and turning a blind
eye to the only way to learn. By rejecting even the idea of being wrong, the stubborn
person has denied logic and reason. In denying the possibility, they have shown
that they are overly prideful.
However, I suppose that's not the entire story. Many people have lessons or
beliefs instilled in them from day one, and it is remarkably difficult to
change such things. Sure, there is some degree of pride in knowledge such as
this, but whether we wish to believe it or not, we believe in these lessons
because we were taught that they were the right things to believe. It's as
simple as that. For example, regardless of your religious affiliation, your
parents or guardians probably taught you what to believe and how to believe in
it. They taught you this from day one, and in doing so blinded you to other religions.
I'm not saying this is bad; without doing this, they would consider themselves
bad parents. According to most belief systems parents are required to teach the
religion and make sure the children follow it, so it would follow that this is
the way to do it. However, this is a prime example of a truth that has been
pounded into memory and tradition, giving no leeway for new information.
Sometimes, this can hurt more than help. So, it's not always entirely the
stubborn person's fault that they are stubborn, but unmoving negotiators still
hold themselves to some level of pride due to their "correct"
beliefs, and you will always be wrong if you differ.
beliefs instilled in them from day one, and it is remarkably difficult to
change such things. Sure, there is some degree of pride in knowledge such as
this, but whether we wish to believe it or not, we believe in these lessons
because we were taught that they were the right things to believe. It's as
simple as that. For example, regardless of your religious affiliation, your
parents or guardians probably taught you what to believe and how to believe in
it. They taught you this from day one, and in doing so blinded you to other religions.
I'm not saying this is bad; without doing this, they would consider themselves
bad parents. According to most belief systems parents are required to teach the
religion and make sure the children follow it, so it would follow that this is
the way to do it. However, this is a prime example of a truth that has been
pounded into memory and tradition, giving no leeway for new information.
Sometimes, this can hurt more than help. So, it's not always entirely the
stubborn person's fault that they are stubborn, but unmoving negotiators still
hold themselves to some level of pride due to their "correct"
beliefs, and you will always be wrong if you differ.
The point I'm trying to achieve is that we should always keep an open mind
to the possibilities. In the end, we can only benefit from guided
open-mindedness in our vast attempt to learn, whether it is learning about the
meaning of life, or simply disproving some faulty math lesson. Now I know that
not everyone will agree with me that open-mindedness isn't always good;
sometimes, they would say, it shows inability to stand firm and hold ground. I
find that this is especially prevalent on matters of religion, when people will
not give the time of day to anyone with differing opinions. But I would ask
such people to answer these questions: Why are you so afraid to question
yourself? Are you so afraid to be wrong that you won't take the chance? After
all, why not shoot for the only two possible outcomes: Prove yourself wrong and
be better educated, or strengthen your own knowledge through proving it to your
debate opponent.
to the possibilities. In the end, we can only benefit from guided
open-mindedness in our vast attempt to learn, whether it is learning about the
meaning of life, or simply disproving some faulty math lesson. Now I know that
not everyone will agree with me that open-mindedness isn't always good;
sometimes, they would say, it shows inability to stand firm and hold ground. I
find that this is especially prevalent on matters of religion, when people will
not give the time of day to anyone with differing opinions. But I would ask
such people to answer these questions: Why are you so afraid to question
yourself? Are you so afraid to be wrong that you won't take the chance? After
all, why not shoot for the only two possible outcomes: Prove yourself wrong and
be better educated, or strengthen your own knowledge through proving it to your
debate opponent.
Well, that having been said:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)