Have you ever met someone who has supposedly acquired a positive habit, only to break that habit later? What were your feelings when you discovered it?

My finding, is that anytime anyone has been discovered breaking some bad habit, or acting contrary to some openly announced commitment, they were derided, even if their efforts were genuine.

We've experienced it thousands of times in our lives. A person who has taken to Christianity, is called "unchristian" if a bilical precept is not maintained, is forgotten, or is unknown. A person trying to lose weight, who is attempting to change lifestyles, is ridiculed when 

We face ridicule when we are unable to perfectly maintain a lofty commitment towards growth. The people who succeed, it seems, are those who are successful in staying focused on what matters, and what matters are averages, consistencies, and overall results.

It may seem cliche to say that life is too rich to capture with single words, but this fact is often overlooked. A biography cannot consist of a few words, or a eulogy. A person cannot be known by their ideological commitments alone, or from a few paragraphs o text. 

If there's one thing I learned about being a vegetarian, or an atheist, or a political independent, is that the labels are really misleading. No one can ever guess, by the categories that are applied to me, what I am like in real life, and how I actually behave. If that's true for myself, then I'm pretty certain it's true for you too. Your life is really rich and detailed, and the categories others would apply, or the ones you would cling to, are probably very far from adequate in describing who you are.

Going by the words, when people come to know you, they will find all sorts of contradictions. In this way, familiarity breeds contempt. Your defects are noticed. The asymmetries are detected. And even worse, gaps are filled with fantasy and rumor, and inconsistencies are invented.

Give me a person and I can find an inconsistency, between who they think they are, and how they are in real life. Show me someone who talks a lot, and I will find all kinds of mismatches between word and deed. Any meticulous person with a good memory and a critical mindset can do the same, if they look carefully at me as well. 

The big differences lie in the frequency, severity, duration, type, and expression of hypocracies. "We are all hypocrites", the pathological narcissist or degenerate will tell us, to equalize themselves with people who actually grow—but obviously it is a matter of many variables and degrees.

Instead of asking if we are hypocrites or not, we should ask ourselves: when should I care if I'm called a hypocrite? When should I not care?

I don't want to talk about every type of hypocrisy here, because I'm much more interested in the relationship between social judgment and personal growth. Any of us who are good people, trying to grow and improve, who are willing to make changes, and big commitments, face a barrage of negativity from people who are unable to extricate themselves from stagnation and motionlessness. I'm concerned about stagnation and motionlessness too, and that is why I wrote about procrastination and motivation previously, and intend to expand that series. Here I'm more concerned about how certain personalities inflict stagnation on other people with their painstaking commentaries on personal imperfections. 

When we are kids, everyone was inconsistent. When young we could also detect who was jealous and who was supportive, among our peers. Consistentcy becomes much more important socially, when we get older, so there's a major shift with that. Some people who were less supportive in youth, learn, and become more supportive in adulthood. People who might have been jealous lose their jealousy as well— while some others discover it, in bitterness and self loathing. I am interested in revealing to people that they really never became as consistent as they hoped, and that they really are much like they were when they were children. But this does not mean that we should not commit, or stand up forcertain principles, and accept the necessity of categorization. We shouldn't become too cynical about growth and progress.


## When we were kids we were big hypocrites.

When you were a kid, how big of a hypocrite were you? How often did your social presentation to others conflict with your behavior?

When I was a kid, I was a bundle of contradictions. I was extremely talkative, and I was a chonic exaggerrator. I was also highly active. So there was plenty of open contradictions between what I said and what I did, so I was probably a prime specimen of hypocrisy and inconcsistency, when I was a kid.

Inwardly, I probably had as many, if not more contradictions, than I showed outwardly. I had no idea who I wanted to be, and I continually confused who I really was with my dreams at the moment. I had an active imagination, and many dreams, but few commitments to any dreams or any fixed identities.

I was mostly a wild child, raised free-range. I had no concerns about matching my behavior to any ideology. I didn't have an idiology. Like any other kid, I tried to follow the rules, and my instincts about what acceptible behavior was, both to myself and other people. There were patterns in my behavior that adults could detect, regarding my tastes, desires, and tendencies. There were also patterns in my thinking, that I wasn't entirely aware of and others could only glean from my normal speech and communication. At that time, I was not very interested in lining up my behavior with my thinking, except to prevent others from pointing out my inconsistencies. What was of more concern, at that time, was matching my behavior to rules, and I was very concerned about following instructions and pleasing adults.

Somehow, eventually, we turn our concern about hypocrisy inwards, in an attempt to match our thinking with our speech and our behavior, and to match all of these with social norms and expected behavior. Those who are extremely concerned about this, have been termed by some as "hyper socialized" in that they are excessively worried about social judgments about inconsistencies.

This process appears to become more important, as we begin to create an identity for ourselves. When we accept an ideology, or make a big commitment, that we personally identify ourselves with.  

Is identity a real thing though. It is very difficult for us to communicate what exactly our identities are, and if we try to write it down, we find ourselves muddled. Our identities are better expressed, by simply telling the stories of our lives, and if we do that, we can see that what we consider our identities, are only a small part of our lives, and the reality of everything else that we are, and have been through, cannot be cast off. The bigger story of our lives provides a much better description of our identity, than some list of commitments and ideologies.

While it is hard to write an autobiography, it is even harder to say who we are when we are asked. We're not really sure precisely how to answer such a question, and we explain our identities differently to different people at different times, at different ages, and when our moods and emotions shift.


## Our autobiographies will provide different models of inconsistency.

We are tempted to be dualistic about hypocrisy. What that means, is that we tend to think we are or we aren't, and that to be a hypocrite is bad, and to not be a hypocrite is good. This is really simplistic and unfortunate, because the truth is much more complex and subtle than that. As the narcissist would tell us, to protect their egos, we are all hypocrites. But that doesn't imply that we are "bad." This is a trick of the degenerate- the degenerate confuses good poeple into thinking that they are as bad as he is. 

Hypocristy is an issue of identity management, and outward presentation of that identity. Hypocrisy is about controlling social perceptions, and 

What is even more difficult, however, is trying to stay truthful and "authentic" about your own life.

If we look at how we develop our identities and goals from youth onward, it is easier to be less severe in our judgements about people's inconsistencies.

It is important to make a distinction between petty contradictions and deep hypocirisies. Everyone is a hypocrite in one way or another, but only the Narcissist or Megalomaniac claims that all hypocrasies are the same, to make the good or progressive person seem as guilty as themselves.

We are all extremely sensitive to being called hypocrites, but unfortunately, the most committed, most moral, most personally progressive people are plagued with guilt about it. The degenerate woudl be correct to point out that everyone is a hypocrite (or a "sinner"), but that in no way equalizes people in their maturity, growth, and moral worth.

The word hypocrite has been abused for a very long time. We cannot expect peole to change in their usage, or in their sensitivity to trifling and imagined contradictions. We can 

Many have pointed out that the easiest way to avoid criticism is to never say or do anything interesting. You could take a vow of silence, or stop making big commitments, but that is hardly a productive choice. If you don't speak often, then people will have a tough time finding contradictions between your words and deeds; but they probably wouldn't want to, because you would be so boring. If you don't try to do anything significant, then your contradictions will be really uninteresting. People like to tear down perfections, or large pretenses. They care much less at finding petty mismatches.

I have always been a very talkative person. More so as a kid than now, but this has always opened me up for criticism, and for comparisons between how I portrayed myself and who I wanted to be, and my actions. It didn't help, that as a kid I was a natural braggadocio and chronic exaggerator.

Everyone is sensitive to being called a Hypocrite. But everyone also knows how difficult it is to keep our behavior consistent with our commitments; and it is even more diffuclt to prevent others from either detecting or inventing inconsistencies, or to be able to tell the difference between the two.

How long would you want your autobiography to be?

What would be your epitome, epitaph, and *eulogy*?

We all want to take this life we have lived, and put some positive spin on it. The shorter the better.

The best representation, would be so complex—nothing short than a model of the entire earth, all people on it, the and the state of our brains, and thoughts contained, from birth through death. But that is very boring. Our audience wants something short, and we want soemthing even shorter.

Would you be content with a few words, or would you require many pages? Would a book be enough? How about a long documentary? 

It is hard to write truthfully about anything, so how much harder is it to write truthfully about your own life?

What kind of artistry, or composition would be required, to make *your story* perfect for you? Or more to the point— to make it acceptable to you? 

We are searching for representations of ourselves that are not accurate, or complete, but fulfill a need we have, to control our story.

We want to project our fantasy of ourselves, or the best parts of ourselves, for others to see and remember. 

Autobiographers want to control their stories; they want to pre-empt the slander, and accuracies, of the biographers. They want to create the right self image, and to falisify history, but do not know what art is required, to achieve it, both with the magnificence and completeness they require.

Let it be clear, there is no summary that can capture your life, or who you are. There is no representation that can explain your identity.

This is just talking about autobiographies, the epitomes of our lives? What about just controlling our stories, in the here an now. Few will write autobiographies, but everyone is interested in the narratives of their own lives, and our identities.

It is here where we find that no truthful autobiography is possible. We are stuck in identities, labels, categories, and adjectives, all of which describe us poorly. 

Are we guilty or innocent? Nice or mean? Good or Bad? Are the words we have sophisticated enough, to present a clear model, or representation of who we are? 

This is why we rely on the arts. Let us not say we are beautiful or ugly, but just have a sculpture made, for others to judge, or a painting, or photographs?

Yet we are selective in the presentation, whatever the medium we choose.

Whatever presentation we prepare, it is not the right summary. It is just what we wante to be remembered by. We wish to constrain the minds of others, to have the perceptions that we judge acceptible.

From our entire autobiographies, to the simplest facts about ourselves at any given time, we want control, to feel that others perceive us in a way that satisfies our own desires.

But what are you *really* like?

Could it be, that you dislike your actual life, so much so, that you wish to substitute it, with something better?

There is no person who can tell a truly accurate story about their own existence. 

The true story is nothing more than a replica of the entire story. Imagine a recording of your life, perfectly preserved, would it be as neat and satisfying, as the story you would tell your grandkids? Would it be boring?

When I hear someone say "I'm a realist", I laugh to myself, and think "you aren't even real about that."

My life can be captured by no less than a perfect recording of the entire thing, a playback of all my thoughts, and the states of my brain from birth to death. There is no summary. If an entity really wanted to know everything about me, they would need to know everything about the earth and its history as well. Here you go alien, to understand me, here is all the data concerning my universe. Oh you need more than this? I didn't realize it was that complex...

Are you ready to summarize your life with a label or two? Does a quote, or a catchphrase, capture your whole existence? Does a movement, or ideology, explain everything that is you? No, you would need paragraphs to capture your life—more than this, you need many pages. If you attempt to write, however, you find that pages are also limited. They are easy to fill.

Besides words, what would you want to include? Is a carefully crafted description of your life really ever complete? Would you need videos, illustrations, pictures, and art? What about music?

Whose autobiographies, would you want to intermix with your own? Is your story complete, without the story of your mother, or your father? Your brothers? Your friends, grandparents, or those people who played special roles in your life?

## Just commit to worthy goals, work, and learn. 

I recall this on occasion, yet there are labels I cling to, and labels I shun. 

I confess I am unable to tell my story. I can hardly prepare a sentence I am willing to commit to. There is no story I can tell, that includes the whole truth, that would satisfy my integrity and intellect, and keep me from private shame and guilt.

There is a reason, some autobiographers are especially interested in exrtreme candor. They want to be real and authentic. Yet they must make choices in what to say, and how to convey it. They will err on the side of taste, whether they wish to or not.

I like to think of myself as a prrogressive person, and while there is truth in this, I think healthier ways of thinking are more about growth and maturity. We are all getting older, and sometimes we mistake the changes associated with aging, and milestones, as progress, when really we are just following the normal course of human maturization. 


Would it consist of a paragraph, or of pages? Of a short book, or a long one? Would you need videos?

How would you go about completing a brief representation of your life?

What would you leave out, and what would you *commit* to printing? Could you say it?

Humans are chronic exaggerators. Many will make plans, and few will execute upon them, with perfect consistency. The progressive person, who is able to make changes nearly continuously, daily building upon changes from the previous day, are really rare. Even those who do change, are bound to revert from time to time.

There is an important message in this: everyone, then is hypocritical. Either in thought and deed, or in word and deed. We typically look to the latter when we call peopel hypocrites, and rarely to the former. Yet we have fear and guilt, of *potentially being called hypocritical* because of the former.

Execution upon goals and commitments, involving personal habits especially, is really rare, but people tend to make very lofty goals for themselves. While many encourage setting large goals, it is quite common that we are unable to alter ourselves fast enough, or consistently enough, to fully realize them.

Often we cannot tell if our goals are large or unreasonable. Mixed with a long list of hopes, a small and challenging goal can be next to impossible to complete, with energies depleted, and time consumed.

We want to be great, we want to be somethign different. We aspire to become something other than we are, achieve things we are currently incapable of achieving, and gain notoriety, attention, and perhaps fame. We wish to become something worthy of admiration and respect.

Progressive people, who work hard to change themselves continuously, are more perceptive than others about how difficult self-alteration really is. Attainment requires focus, hard work, the right personality and disposition, and plenty of time and energy. Very few people seem to be able to rapidly change themselves, 

First comes desire, then comes commitment, and if motivation doesn't disappear, there is a ton of repetitive hard work, building upon previous work.

There are two things that can happen during this process pertaining to hypocrisy. One can talk to much, announcing plans and goals, or even claiming to have already attained the goal prematurely. The fastest path to success is to pretend it, or expect success prematurely. Human nature is to be excited, and we can see in children they like to make-believe and imagine success before doing any work towards the goal. But this is probably a part of the natural process of learning about what we really want. We imagine it first, enjoy the thoughts, get some feedback about our ideas, then if our motivation survives, and we have time/energy to support it, we can start action. So in a very real sense our natural though process tends towards a hypocritical state, of confusing an imagined state of future success with the present state.

The big social mistake is to announce these plans, or to reveal these thoughts, claiming them to be more than fantasies about what could be. We see this as a mark of immaturity. The mature person has learned to make plans and act according to them first, before making any announcements. There is risk in provoking claims of hypocristy.

Somehow we become oversensitive to this judgment.

Dualism is important because it leads us to the wrong analysis, but also-- since others will be perpetually lead to make the wrong analysis themselves, you have to defend against having a label applied. Labels *are* binary. Usually they are on or they are off. In any case, people will usually apply or not apply it to you, and it is in your interest to make their binary valuation in your interest. So you are constrained to seeking people to say you are *not hypocritical*, because you will nto be able to convince them that it is a matter of degree, severity, or that everyone is both, taken over time. No one is going to achive that level of clarity with respect to hypocritical or most other labels (there are too many to get through, to make the same analysis, and we are stuck with binary combinations of words in our langauge, words and their antonyms, and the words and their negations). 

Sensitivity to being called a hypocrite, or inconsistent, has resulted in an incredible amount of guilt among highly disciplined, progressive people.

Mostly everyone is extremely sensitive to claims about contradiction or hypocrisy. 

Two things to know about Hypocrisy:

When you commit yourself to something challenging, be it diet based, religion based, habit based, or whatever... people will *always* be able to find some superficial contradiction to make you look inconsistent, insincere, or foolish.

1) You are not in control of relationships that can be seen between yourself and the world around you. There are endless associations between yourself and your surroundings. From such associations, people are good at conjuring incidental dissonances. These apparent contradictions will make you feel like a hypocrite, when you're not. You're learning, or you stumbled. You're on a mission of sorts, with hurdles along the way. These apparent contradictions will make you feel like a hypocrite when you're not. The secret is to know what you're trying to achieve on average, and to not lose sight of that. Forget the labels you might apply to yourself, that others with similar goals would want to apply. As similar as your goals might be to theirs, you are not going to be doing the same things they are. Haters and doubters and jealous people will never be unabl to find fresh and new connections to perturb you. Even the uncreative are astonishingly creative at finding or inventing weaknesses and errors in the behavior of other people. You are not responsible for people in contrary moods.

2) Make sure a contradiction is not a deep an meaningful one, if you can. You have probably heard of "cognitive dissonance." If a contradiction is deep enough, you are likely to cover it up, but it is much healthier to weaken your defenses against seeing your flaws. Some hypocrisy is real. The key is to know what it is you are trying to achieve, how you present yourself to others, and if your behavior is deeply contradicting, either in severity or frequency.

Often times you can tell if it is true or not by who tells you and what kind of mood or disposition they are in.

There is no need to feel guilty about false hypocrisy. If you get good at spotting it, you can brush it off more quickly, and remain steady and confident.

Also, if you are being hypocritical, admit it. When you admit it, your shame will vanish and you'll find you don't need to defend your ego against this any longer. If you can admit it, you are more likely to make the changes you want.
