Dissertation, University of Warwick (2020)

Authors
Kartik Upadhyaya
University of Warwick
Abstract
Hypocrisy seems to be a distinctive moral wrong. This thesis offers an account of that wrong. The distinctive wrong of hypocrisy is not a rational failing, or a deception of others. It is a problem in how we critique, and blame, others, when we ourselves are guilty of similar faults. Not only does it seem wrong to blame others hypocritically; it is also widely remarked that hypocrites ‘lack standing’ to blame. I defend both judgments. When we engage others in response to wrongdoing, there is both instrumental and non-instrumental value in ensuring that those who face similar moral predicaments reason about these predicaments, and the appropriate responses to them, together. Hypocrisy is wrong because it hampers our ability to realise that value. And hypocrites lose standing to blame for a similar reason. Standing depends on the value of particular people engaging in an accountability procedure together, a value which the hypocrite forestalls, by failing to acknowledge wrongdoing in the course of blaming. This account of a duty to blame non-hypocritically helps unpack the relationship between hypocrisy and a range of other defects in a person’s standing. It also responds to a central sceptical challenge to the wrongness of hypocritical blaming. The challenge is that accurate hypocritical blaming can’t be wrong because it is morally good, and indeed is morally better than not blaming others at all. My response: hypocritical blaming is wrong, not because it is morally worse than not blaming at all, but because it is second-best, i.e. worse than non-hypocritical blaming, which enables mutual deliberation about wrongdoing.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,916
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame.Thomas Scanlon - 2008 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Ethics Without Principles.Jonathan Dancy - 2004 - Oxford University Press.
The Moral Problem.Michael Smith (ed.) - 1994 - Wiley.

View all 75 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Hypocrisy as Either Deception or Akrasia.Christopher Bartel - 2019 - Philosophical Forum 50 (2):269-281.
Hypocrisy is Vicious, Value-Expressing Inconsistency.Benjamin Rossi - 2021 - The Journal of Ethics 25 (1):57-80.
The Commitment Account of Hypocrisy.Benjamin Rossi - 2018 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (3):553-567.
Hypocrisy and Moral Seriousness.Roger Crisp & Christopher J. Cowton - 1994 - American Philosophical Quarterly 31 (4):343 - 349.
Adolescent Hypocrisy.John Mitchell - 1975 - Journal of Moral Education 5 (1):19-23.
Here's How to Hack Hypocrisy.Susanna Siegel - 2020 - Tampa Bay Times, October 30.
Pure Hypocrisy.Tony Lynch & A. Fisher - 2012 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 19 (1):32-43.
Hypocrisy is Vicious, Value-Expressing Inconsistency.Benjamin Rossi - 2020 - The Journal of Ethics 25 (1):57-80.
Moral Hypocrisy.Jessica Isserow - 2020 - Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Hypocrisy and Self‐Deception.Daniel Statman - 1997 - Philosophical Psychology 10 (1):57-75.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-11-30

Total views
27 ( #420,278 of 2,497,975 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #32,353 of 2,497,975 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes