English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room - 2019-08-30

« first day (3214 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (1699 days later) »

8:26 AM

Would a question asking if "hypocrisy" implies "lying" be on-topic?

I tried doing a Google search for "liar vs hypocrite" and it wasn't helpful.

Is that on-topic for this site?

8:47 AM

> From the attitude of my cat towards me, I understood that he sees me as a god. That is, he forgets about my existence until there's something that he need from me.

9:07 AM

@forest I guess it's on-topic, but I also guess it would be shut down as general reference.

Ah

A hypocrite is not a liar, that is sort of the whole point. They genuinely believe in both of the conflicting things.

3

That's why you often see the two nouns together. People say someone is "a hypocrite and liar".

A hypocrite is lying to themselves, of course. That's how it comes about. But we enter the realm of philosophy there. That is not something specific to the English language, you know.

Ah, OK.

I was wondering because someone told me that, by saying a post sounded hypocritical, that I was accusing the poster of being a liar. I disagreed, but they were adamant that I was using the word wrong. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't going crazy.

A liar will tell you that slavery is bad, while being firmly convinced that slavery is actually really good.

A hypocrite will tell you that slavery is bad, while being genuinely convinced that slavery is bad. But then they'll go out and buy sneakers sewn by a four-year old in Bangladesh.

These are two completely different things. Which is why they are two completely different words. So I would start by pointing out that simple fact.

After all, if you wanted to accuse the poster of being a liar, you'd just say "the poster is a liar".

But you didn't. So what's the point of saying you said something that you did not.

9:24 AM

Ah.

Very frustrating since I was suspended for a month for accusing another mod of being a liar, when saying that said mod wrote a post that "seems hypocritical to me". So it's glad to know I was right.

It's hard when a Google search just treats them as synonyms.

2 hours later…

Captain Bohemian

11:13 AM

do you want to take a shower?

2 hours later…

1:09 PM

@forest 'Synonym'' doesn't mean that you can replace one with the other always. It just means they are similar/nearby/-maybe- closer to what you want or maybe not. It's not math where you can substitute one for the other in all circumstances.

I know. I just had a hard time explaining that. :/

cool, I'm just adding extra commentary to help with the explanation.

A liar says one thing but believes (or acts) the opposite very consciously. A hypocrite says one things but believes (or acts) the opposite possibly without realizing it. So obviously they're nearby.

And both when applied to someone can be accusatory (and mean), but hypocrisy is not as serious as outright lying.

So one can be construed as another, but they're not identical.

But are you 'right'? It's a judgment call.

1:44 PM

Hypocrites vs. Liars; is there a distinction or merely a tangled web?

@forest currently adjunct professor teaching criminal justice courses

They're obviously similar. The difference is intent/awareness and that assessment leads to what to do about the lying/hypocrisy.

wow, you're a fast reader

.

..

user image

...

2:33 PM

I love talking about nothing... It is the only thing I know anything about.

1 hour later…

3:44 PM

Ugh...I have more to say...

Lying is you someone and saying "I did not kill them.".
Hypocrisy is you killed someone and saying "You shouldn't kill people.".

1 hour later…

5:13 PM

What do you call someone with no body and no nose?

5:27 PM

@Cerberus I don't know. What do you call someone with no body and no nose?

@Mitch Nobody knows.

Bah dumm tiss

Did you like it? I heard that one in a Starcraft video.

@Robusto Well, the main reason to learn a language (for me) is to read books.

And reading books helps a great deal, especially those of good quality.

I can say I learned reasonably French from reading novels.

My French was fairly basic high-school stuff before that.

It also helps a great deal in understanding people. I could understand almost everything our Air BNB person was explaining to me.

Only speaking is still difficult for me, because my active vocabulary just very slow. But I very rarely need to have a serious conversation in French anyway, and, if I should ever come to be a in situation where I need that, it will be because I live or work with French people, in which case I'll pick that up quickly anyway.

I could understand every single word and still I wouldn't understand people.

There's that.

5:40 PM

+1 " I very rarely need to have a serious conversation in French anyway"

Most people just can't do: "in which case I'll pick that up quickly anyway."

Most people just can't do what?

Like with my Air BNB bloke, I needed to talk to him about the house and other stuff, and that was slow and difficult for me.

But groceries and musaea are fine qua conversations.

6:35 PM

@Cerberus pick up a language quickly as needed.

from a book or just chitchatting

@Mitch Well, I think most people can pick up speaking fairly quickly when they live in a foreign country or have to work with people every day.

@Cerberus groceries and musea are the fine qua non of conversation

Indeed.

The necessities of tourist life.

@Cerberus a sprinkle of vocab maybe

Nah.

They will be able to speak the language in a few months.

6:37 PM

You are, by profession, almost guranteeing a certain ability, a philologist.

@Cerberus 10 years olds yes. 18 year olds no.

(not without intensive instruction)

Also, Duolingo is no substitute

Is "Übermensch" an offensive term? I thought it meant superman.

@Mitch No, any person.

@KitZ.Fox How dare you even refer to that?

Seriously though, @Mitch.

@Mitch No, I'm talking about living in a foreign country and being forced to speak French all day long.

6:41 PM

I was just reading an Atlantic monthly article on about even referring to the 'n-word'.

@KitZ.Fox It is often associated with Nazi ideas.

Hmm.

@KitZ.Fox haha. No I don't find it offensive at all.

They were inspired by, or at least liked big parts of, Nietschze's work.

BUt as @Cerb alludes, some guilt by association.

and it al depends on how it is used.

6:42 PM

It's a username that someone pointed out.

'fat' is not an offensive term... but when you say it to someone's face...

@KitZ.Fox Oh.

hm... context

So basically like calling yourself NaziSquaddie14 or something?

It's certainly a hint. but not certainly offensive.

'squaddle's are the worst.

because although I think that's gross, it's different than KillAllWhateverGroupsIDon'tLike

@Cerberus it depends.

on a lot

6:44 PM

@KitZ.Fox Not that bad.

It is a philosophical term invented by N., abused by the Nazis.

But they abused many other things.

So I would let it be.

@KitZ.Fox Yeah. 'UM' should attract some ribbing as self aggrandizing and may be a hint to what they might do later, but is not prima facie, ceteris paribus, ipso facto obiter dictum offensive.

It'd be on par with having an avatar name 'John Galt'.

N. invented the Übermensch as a personification of various philosphical ideals, none of which fascist, I believe. But:

please please please someone ask me 'Who is John Galt?'

> The term Übermensch was used frequently by Hitler and the Nazi regime to describe their idea of a biologically superior Aryan or Germanic master race;[15] a racial version of Nietzsche's Übermensch became a philosophical foundation for National Socialist ideas.[16][17] The Nazi notion of the master race also spawned the idea of "inferior humans" (Untermenschen) who should be dominated and enslaved; this term does not originate with Nietzsche, who was critical of both antisemitism and German nationalism.

Personally, I feel that Untermensch wins as a username because of superior irony.

@Mitch Who is he?

Happy now? Bai!

nice... thanks.. . you blew the quote.

6:49 PM

The Übermensch (German for "Beyond-Man", "Superman", "Overman", "Superhuman", "Hyperman", "Hyperhuman"; German pronunciation: [ˈyːbɐmɛnʃ]) is a concept in the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. In his 1883 book Thus Spoke Zarathustra (German: Also sprach Zarathustra), Nietzsche has his character Zarathustra posit the Übermensch as a goal for humanity to set for itself. It is a work of philosophical allegory, with a structural similarity to the Gathas of Zoroaster/Zarathustra. == In English == In 1896, Alexander Tille made the first English translation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra, rendering Übermensch...

@Cerberus OK, thanks. I marked the flag as helpful but left the username be.

@Cerberus A self-aggrandizing would-be artist-hero misunderstood be his contemporaries

Ah.

Because there's a line in the novel of which much is made namely (literally) 'Who is John Galt?'

sees

7:31 PM

@CaptainBohemian I did want to take a shower just two minutes ago. Really really badly.

But then I took the shower, and now I don't want to take a shower anymore.

In conclusion, my answer to your question is inconclusive.

7:48 PM

@forest The thing about synonyms is that they only ever — only ever! — exist in context.

2

No two words are completely interchangeable at all times. Again, that is why they are two words and not one word.

The easiest way to come to terms with that is to think antonyms first.

The opposite of man can be woman, boy, robot, god, alien, teenager, tsar, plant, animal — even though any man is a type of animal, actually. You know.

So then. If in each context the antonym of man can be so drastically different, then well, so will be its synonym.

Sometimes it will be replaceable by male, othertimes by paysant, othertimes by mortal, other times still by carbon-based life form. Sometimes exactly none of these things will fit the bill. But at no point ever will all these things fit the bill.

There is absolutely no way to find a synonym for anything at all until you've seen the context.

Outside of context, synonyms do not exist.

@Cerberus ""Behold, the Underminer! I'm always beneath you, but nothing is beneath me!"

Ecce sotto uomo

2 hours later…

9:22 PM

@Mitch Oh, noes!

« first day (3214 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (1699 days later) »

Transcript for

Aug '1930

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…

Not for the faint of heart or those easily triggered by Englis...

phrase-requests pronunciation single-word-requests synonyms

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile