Contact Jacob Delafon Paris

Is being polite means being hypocritical?

Hello Dr. Philo!

I have a disturbing question:

Is being polite means being hypocritical?

Where are the boundaries between politeness and hypocrisy?

the question box

Hello, honorable correspondent. May Heaven be gracious to you and your wishes come true.

is what the Doctor Philo will try to do for you.

1 - politeness as social code

- The idea that politeness could be a form of calculation means that it would be hypocritical morally commendable to be rude to some people, and that the person's own calculation would be hypocrisy that distorts the true politeness.

We then include Alceste, the misanthrope who has flared in Molière's effect against the cowardice of courtiers with cautious politeness hide their true thoughts as hypocritical compliments. Politeness can be the cloak of respectability that actually covers the hypocrisy.

- However, one is tempted also to oppose this with the politeness obeying a cultural and social norm, just as the executioner made a thousand Chinese kowtow to what he will cut into 120 pieces alive. Nobody will say it is hypocritical of him, but we admire the rigor of the social norm that is needed even in these extreme cases.

2 - Politeness is a virtue morality (respect for others):

Kant's respect for others recognize its value as a human being. Respect is the effect produced on us by the supreme value of others in morals, manners would be the most common mark of this respect, provided of course be agreed and not imposed by the use.

3 - Where are the boundaries between politeness and hypocrisy?

between politeness and hypocrisy, the difference would be in the sincerity, or rather the absence or presence of the second degree. Politeness is without calculation or background : as they say, is what you can not refuse, it is the least we . The hypocrisy would be in the field of politeness, an assignment, something that meets a calculation of interest.

could then say that we are too polite to be honest as suggested by the proverb.

4 - A world without politeness is it desirable?

We recall the story of Schopenhauer's Porcupines (read here to ) politeness is what we found best to support each other. Ultimately, a world without manners is

has - a fusion community, made of porcupine quills without and I, according to Kant, with respect for humanity, the duty to love men - at least all those who gave voice their humanity (the others having all the same right, as we said at the close).

b - a world without friction because all the rough edges have been erased. Suffice to say we have robots or clones. It would be a company that has been through conflict imaginable, turning its rough blocks of individuals perfectly smooth pebbles. But as Bergson says, it will take many wars to achieve this.

Miami Day Care Prices

Notebooks invisible, screen exposed to the mezzanine of the Circle (Québec, QC)

info: www.le-cercle.ca

How Does The Wwe Travel

2c1ppw The crew at "La Bomba" Event Response in situ at the beach of Lake Simon (Portneuf, QC.)

Most Reliable Pc's 2010

Can we disobey the laws? The future

The advantage of this issue is being raised from a very distant past - with Antigone, for example - and ask ourselves today, where web laws will turn into delinquents countless downloaders of the Net.

The downside was that we like being trapped by failure to respond affirmatively to a law which could be disobeyed with impunity would no longer be one.

The law in effect, unlike the rule, admits of no exception, and no can not be above the law, except to be within the realm of nature, that is to say the balance of power: the "law" of the jungle.

Then: Antigone Creon is a rebel that would be right to punish, whatever the Gods?

Obviously not: for Antigone claims to be a law - the law of God - who wants his brother's funeral, and that law is above the law of the city defended by Creon.

-> 1 st idea: there is a hierarchy of laws: laws must be consistent them, and when two statutes are in conflict, one that is greater legitimacy than outweighs the lower. We can disobey it if it is the condition to obey that.

remains to be seen how the upper and lower what is?

remains particularly whether there are cases where all laws are on the same plane, thus implying that one can not disobey the law by claiming a greater legitimacy.

-> 2 nd idea : All legislators claim to be unique, and when this is not the case, they take the system of higher laws as a preamble to their constitution. So are all plans that do not lay with the laws of God, so do we do with the Declaration of Human Rights .

As these laws are well defined and codified, there is normally no problem.

... Except that the problem is still: in the interpretation of the facts, and therefore the application of the law.

-> 3 rd idea: we can try to prove you do not disobey the laws, despite appearances.

downloaders See the Net: they do not shout "Down with private property! . They simply say that their practices do not despoil the artists as they would in any case not purchased their registration with the price. They only correct an injustice - as Robin Hood, they just steal the robbers.