The more I search about hypocrisy, the more I see that it's something that is detested by the masses.
I wonder if there is anytime or anywhere in the world or during history that a nation valued hypocrisy, advised for it, cherished it, saw it as a morally and ethically good thing, and preached it?
I suggest that is just marketing.
We might call the same behaviour stubborn, or determined.
One persons hypocrisy, is another's ‘pragmatic flexibility in the encounter with realpolitik’, say.
“Never attempt to win by force what can be won by deception.”
“A man who is used to acting in one way never changes; he must come to ruin when the times, in changing, no longer are in harmony with his ways.”
-Machiavelli, in The Prince
I would describe Machiavelli as having basically game—theory derived ethics, and in that context his judgements turn on what works, and how people behave in practice.
We more usually in philosophy deal with intersubjective-derived ethics, about universalising personal rules, like Kant’s Imperative or Rawl’s theory of justice.
It’s important to consider context. Say you are in a war against desperate opposition, saying someone trying to shoot you is also a hypocrite, not useful. And keeping standards of honesty and consistency when lives are on the line, may look morally unjustifiable to those people. You could argue satisfying your conscience is a luxury weighed against heavy consequences. The British were extremely deceptive in WW2, indeed they had earned the nickname Perfidious Albion already back during the French Revolution. By contrast, almost no German-born spies operated in WW2, they had to use foreign nationals.
In practice there is a tension between these systems. Often more concern for family members, isn’t written into ethical theories. It’s a game-theory product, from natural selection. Kant wrote On a Supposed Right to Tell Lies from Benevolent Motives, and I think it’s fair to say the overwhelming majority of philosophers and others consider it an unjustifiably extreme stance. The converse, is that very few would genuinely follow Machiavelli’s advice, or celebrate those that do even if they are successful.
It seems to me that most individuals value harmony over truth. A soft lie is preferable to a hard truth. As to hypocrisy and lies, it is abundant in politics, advertising, and diplomacy. So our current society values hypocrisy privately and condemns it publicly. More hypocrisy. The Prince by Machiavelli is a ruthlessly honest work. I would also recommend The Inferno by Dante for attitudes to hypocrisy.
