Hide Article Text (OCR)
EDITORIALFor Hypocrisyes a bloomin’ Vpocrite,” said the Cockney Catholic. “But he does get something done/' replied the young political science major. Enter the controversy in the form of hypocrisy, double-standard, or the “New Machiavellianism/’ Those with a conservative twist label it pragmatism (perhaps it's more palatable that way).Cavalier Magazine, in their April edition, published an article defending the New Machaivellianism and did an historical run-down through a few centuries to Nicholas Machia-velli and his work, The Prince. (For a man that knew his way around political circles so well, it’s interesting that he spent most of his life in exile.)The recent trend in America is to “use a little psychology” or function with “applied psychology. “Little white lies” or evasion of certain information is quite ok, and in most circles expected. After all, a lawyer doesn't reveal helpful information to his opposition, and “there are things one just doesn’t tell his wife (girl-friend, mother, etc.).” Women too, have “little secrets called “girl-talk.”The problem is not one of Judeo-Christian morality, nor any other type for that matter. Rather, it is a simple problem of function. The most idealistic moralist is forced to acknowledge (or live in ignorance of) the importance of functionality. There definitely are times when the ends justify the means. We train professional killers for the jungles of Viet Nam in order to eliminate their need in the future. Without these trained killers, where would the South Vietnamese or even the Americans be twenty years from now?The man that is realistic enough to cope with modern problems often hangs on to his Judeo-Christian moral standards for Sunday exhibition. Because he is unable to adequately cope with modern society, he uses a machine of rationalization called religion. If it works for him, if it is functional, then it is as valid as any other method of coping with his need.The same approach applies to business, social relationships and any other area of human endeavor. Whether it is called applied psychology or hypocrisy differs little. The names given to things are unimportant and alter so r that they often lose their meaning. The ultimate consideration is the extent to which a given thing or action performs its function. Thus it would be extremely functional and even advantageous for a man to tell his wife she looks beautiful, even if she doesn’t. A girl would tell her fianee he is romantic or handsome, even though a consensus might speak to the contrary. The resulting confidence, trust and security are quite worth any possible pangs of conscience due to fear of “little white lies.”Granted, there is a danger that this functional approach might reach an extreme and many of the Western World’s ethical codes might be lost. If they are lost so easily, are they worth keeping? Aren’t all things carried to an extreme, dangerous?The problem is one of learning to live with life, as it is and probably will be for some time. People are people and all are subject to ego, id and superego. The success one has in the use of these tools will determine his own functionality, the extent to which he achieves his goals.—Jim Sebens
Newspaper Details
Billings Retort
Billings, Montana, US
Fri, Apr 01, 1966
Page 2
Full Page
Clipped by
Anonymous
GB 04 Jul 2021
Other Publications Near Billings, Montana
Billings Herald
Billings Daily Gazette
Billings Weekly Gazette
Billlings Gazette
The Billings Gazette
