Tangri
23rd March 2016, 21:37
Hypocrisy is a situation in which someone pretends to believe something that they do not really believe, or that is the opposite of what they do or say at another time:
Hypocrisy is a cause, as well as a result, of cognitive biases and distortions which predispose humans to effortlessly perceive and condemn faults in others, while failing to perceive and condemn faults of their own.
Hypocrisy has a negative connotation - Double standards is a neutral descriptor
A double standard is the application of different sets of principles for similar situations.[1] A double standard may take the form of an instance in which certain concepts (often, for example, a word, phrase, social norm, or rule) are perceived as acceptable to be applied by one group of people, but are considered unacceptable—taboo—when applied by another group.
The concept of a double standard has long been applied (as early as 1872) to the fact that different moral structures are often applied to men and women in society.[2][3] An example being that a man going out to bars and picking up a different woman to have sex with every night for two weeks, will probably be considered "macho", a "stud", or a "ladies' man". All positive terms, but a woman who went home with 14 different men in a two-week period in the same way as the male example, typically would be labeled a "****" or a "whore", both being pejorative. Conversely, if a man cries, he is commonly seen as "weak" or "pathetic", denoting a negative connotation; but if a woman cries, she is commonly seen as "innocent" and "sensitive", denoting a compassionate connotation.
A double standard can therefore be described as a biased or morally unfair application of the principle that all are equal in their freedoms. Such double standards are seen as unjustified because they violate a basic maxim of modern legal jurisprudence: that all parties should stand equal before the law. Double standards also violate the principle of justice known as impartiality, which is based on the assumption that the same standards should be applied to all people, without regard to subjective bias or favoritism based on social class, rank, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, age, or other distinctions. A double standard violates this principle by holding different people accountable according to different standards.
Policy of double standards is used to describe a situation when the assessment of the same phenomenon, process or event in the international relations, depends on character of the relations of the estimating parties with assessment objects. At identical intrinsic filling of action of one country get support and a justification, and other – is condemned and punished.
The phrase became a classical example of policy of double standards: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter",[4] entered into use by the British writer Gerald Seymour in his work "Harry's Game" in 1975.
Hypocrisy is a cause, as well as a result, of cognitive biases and distortions which predispose humans to effortlessly perceive and condemn faults in others, while failing to perceive and condemn faults of their own.
Hypocrisy has a negative connotation - Double standards is a neutral descriptor
A double standard is the application of different sets of principles for similar situations.[1] A double standard may take the form of an instance in which certain concepts (often, for example, a word, phrase, social norm, or rule) are perceived as acceptable to be applied by one group of people, but are considered unacceptable—taboo—when applied by another group.
The concept of a double standard has long been applied (as early as 1872) to the fact that different moral structures are often applied to men and women in society.[2][3] An example being that a man going out to bars and picking up a different woman to have sex with every night for two weeks, will probably be considered "macho", a "stud", or a "ladies' man". All positive terms, but a woman who went home with 14 different men in a two-week period in the same way as the male example, typically would be labeled a "****" or a "whore", both being pejorative. Conversely, if a man cries, he is commonly seen as "weak" or "pathetic", denoting a negative connotation; but if a woman cries, she is commonly seen as "innocent" and "sensitive", denoting a compassionate connotation.
A double standard can therefore be described as a biased or morally unfair application of the principle that all are equal in their freedoms. Such double standards are seen as unjustified because they violate a basic maxim of modern legal jurisprudence: that all parties should stand equal before the law. Double standards also violate the principle of justice known as impartiality, which is based on the assumption that the same standards should be applied to all people, without regard to subjective bias or favoritism based on social class, rank, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, age, or other distinctions. A double standard violates this principle by holding different people accountable according to different standards.
Policy of double standards is used to describe a situation when the assessment of the same phenomenon, process or event in the international relations, depends on character of the relations of the estimating parties with assessment objects. At identical intrinsic filling of action of one country get support and a justification, and other – is condemned and punished.
The phrase became a classical example of policy of double standards: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter",[4] entered into use by the British writer Gerald Seymour in his work "Harry's Game" in 1975.