Genuine Hypocrisy

Not all hypocrisy is equally irrational and destructive, but it is all irrational.  Is everyone who ever errs automatically a hypocrite, though, even regarding just one aspect of their worldview and behavior?  Hypocrisy is always avoidable, yes: it is not logically necessary for anyone to to hold contradictory beliefs or to act in a way that deviates from truth or even belief.  Still, not every philosophical error or moral failure has to involve hypocrisy.  Even a rationalist could voluntarily give into irrationality or immorality, and yet they are not necessarily a hypocrite.

Whether they were perfect before and recommitted to perfection afterward or they suddenly struggle with an actual error on a recurring basis, this is not the same as genuine hypocrisy in itself.  A person like this is not obliviously a slave to assumptions.  He or she is not by default believing anything irrational or practicing something immoral out of apathy, furthermore.  There does not have to be any trivialization, hostility towards truth, or foundationally invalid priorities behind the choice in question.  To confuse this for blind inconsistency of belief or for uncaring, systematic neglect of their moral stances is to commit an error.

On the contrary, someone who gleefully or carelessly does something immoral while believing it is wrong (even if it is not), no matter how minor, is a hypocrite.  They would also be hypocrites for thinking it immoral while still repeatedly succumbing to it.  Not only do they disregard truth in one way or another, but they also fail to live out their own beliefs.  If they believe in assumptions or impossibilities, they are irrational regardless, and irrationalists are always hypocrites by nature of believing things that are false or unjustified (assumed even if verifiable) while believing or acting as if they are in the right.

Hypocrisy is active, and while irrationalistic people (most people) might not be directly intending to be irrational, they actively continue to make assumptions, refuse to recognize or embrace reason, and habitually ignore even things they have thought about in favor of emotion, convenience, or ineptitude.  Falling into an avoidable ideological and moral mistake, as all such mistakes are avoidable, while recognizing it and repenting is just not the same; it is failure that is not held to.  There does not have to be any irrational belief, any refusal to realize the error, or any resistance to giving it up.  In this context, failure is just failure that does not have to be repeated and that is not accompanied by irrational beliefs.

A person could become an emotionalistic, selfish hypocrite for only a moment, however, and recant in the next.  Being a hypocrite or erring in any other way does not mean someone must or will continue to do so.  It is just that someone who is truly living for truth and falls into sin is not a hypocrite along with those who actively despise truth, reject correction, contradict their own worldview, consistently sin while condemning that particular sin, or try to deceptively present themselves as having a worldview they do not.  A repentant sinner is clearly not the same kind of person.