Cover not available
Part of
The Pragmatics of Hypocrisy
Edited by Sandrine Sorlin and Tuija Virtanen
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 343] 2024
► pp. 231–253

Chapter 10
A plea for hypocrisy

Pragma-philosophical considerations

| University Paul-Valéry – Montpellier 3
This chapter shows to what extent hypocrisy is more ubiquitous and essential than one may think. There are however degrees of hypocrisy that I highlight by elaborating a continuum of the phenomenon that ranges from insincere politeness to deliberate deception. Politics being one of the fields where hypocrisy has been shown to be inevitable, I use the satirical political TV series Veep (HBO 2012–2019) to illustrate what I propose as a “Hypocrisy Principle”. This principle comprises several maxims which consist of flattering and (dis)simulating, each using different forms of language and being the preserve of a certain type of hypocrites. I develop the notion of ‘civil hypocrisy’ for the lighter side of the phenomenon. The darker socially unacceptable side involves the notions of duplicity and simulation that can go all the way towards self-deception.
Keywords: politics, TV series, Hypocrisy Principle, flattery, dissimulation, deceit, civil hypocrisy
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Establishing the frontiers of a pragmatic space
  • 3.Pragmatic degrees in hypocrisy
    • 3.1A continuum
    • 3.2Hypocritical compliments
    • 3.3Dissimulation
    • 3.4Simulation and self-deception
  • 4.The Hypocrisy Principle
  • 5.Civil hypocrisy as shared understanding
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 March 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.343.10sor
References (46)
References
Barnes, John Arundel. 1994. A Pack of Lies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chan, Elaine, Sengupta, Jaideep, 2010. “Insincere Flattery Actually Works: A Dual Attitudes Perspective.” Journal of Marketing Research 47 (1): 122–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Channell, Joanna. 1994. Vague Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chapman, Siobhan. 2005. Paul Grice, Philosopher and Linguist. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Vittorio Tantucci. 2021. “The Principle of (Im)politeness Reciprocity.” Journal of Pragmatics 175: 146–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danziger, Roni. 2020. “The Pragmatics of Flattery: The Strategic Use of Solidarity-oriented Actions.” Journal of Pragmatics 170: 413–425. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dynel, Marta. 2011. “A Web of Deceit: A Neo-Gricean View on Types of Verbal Deception.” International Review of Pragmatics 3 (2): 137–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Killing Two Birds with One Deceit: Deception in Multi-party Interactions.” International Review of Pragmatics 8: 179–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elster, Jon. 2005. “L’usage stratégique de l’argumentation.” Négociations 2 (4): 59–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eylon, Yuval, and Heyd, David. 2008. “Flattery.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 77 (3): 685–704. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feinberg, Leonard. 2002. Hypocrisy: Don’t Leave Home Without It. Greeley: Pilgrims’ Process.Google Scholar
Galasiński, Darlusz. 2000. The Language of Deception: A Discourse Analytical Study. Thousand Oaks: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goel, Suresh. 2015. “Civilizational Dialogue in Conduct of International Diplomacy.” Review of Professional Management 13 (1): 23–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grant, Ruth W. 1997. Hypocrisy and Integrity: Machiavelli, Rousseau and the Ethics of Politics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1974. “Reply to Davidson on ‘Intending’”, HP Grice Papers, BANC MSS 90/135 c, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley.
. 1975. “Logic and Conversation.” In Syntax and semantics. Volume 3: “Speech Acts”, ed. by Peter Cole, and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1989. Study in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 1986. “Compliments and Compliment Responses in New Zealand English.” Anthropological Linguistics 28 (4): 485–508. [URL]Google Scholar
. 1995. Women, Men, and Politeness. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 2009. “Speech Act Research between Armchair, Field and Laboratory: The Case of Compliments.” Journal of Pragmatics 41: 1611–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H., and Taavitsainen, Irma. 2000. “Diachronic Speech Act Analysis: Insults from Flyting to Flaming.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1 (1): 67–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H., Smith, Sara W., and Lüdge, Tanja. 2003. “Interactive Aspects of Vagueness in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1737–1769. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kittay, Eva Feder. 1982. “On Hypocrisy.” Metaphilosophy 13 (3/4): 277–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lackey, Jennifer. 2013. “Lies and Deception: An Unhappy Divorce.” Analysis 73 (2): 236–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 2014. The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, Barbara. 1989. “Praising and Complimenting.” In Contrastive Pragmatics (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 3), ed. by Wieslaw Oleksy, 73–100. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Limberg, Holger. 2009. “Impoliteness and Threat Responses.” Journal of Pragmatics 41: 1376–1394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mikalayeva, Livdmila. 2011. “Negotiating Compliance: Discursive Choices in a Formalized Setting of Diplomatic Communication.” International Journal of Communication 21 (2): 5–25.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Robert W. 1996. “The Psychology of Human Deception.” Social Research 63 (3): 819–861. [URL]Google Scholar
Nyberg, David. 1993. The Varnished Truth: Truth Telling and Deceiving in Ordinary Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Orwell, George. 1989[1949]. Nineteen Eighty-Four. London: Penguins Books.Google Scholar
Runciman, David. 2008. Political Hypocrisy: The Mask of Power from Hobbes to Orwell and Beyond. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sorlin, Sandrine. 2016. Language and Manipulation in House of Cards. A Pragma-Stylistic Perspective. Basingstoke: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “The Pragmatics of Manipulation: Exploiting Im/politeness Theories.” Journal of Pragmatics 121: 132–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2002. “Managing Rapport in Talk: Using Rapport Sensitive Incidents to Explore the Motivational Concerns Underlying the Management of Relations.” Journal of Pragmatics 34: 529–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Introduction.” In Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory, ed. by Helen Spencer-Oatey, 1–8. London, New Delhi, New York, Sydney: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Szabados, Béla. 1979. “Hypocrisy.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 9 (2): 195–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Charlotte. 2015. “Beyond Sarcasm: The Metalanguage and Structures of Mock Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics 87: 127–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H. 2010. Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vincent Marrelli, Jocelyne. 2003. “Truthfulness.” In Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert, and Chris Bulcaen, 1–48. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Words in the Way of Truth: Truthfulness, Deception, Lying across Cultures and Disciplines. Napoli: Edizione Scientifiche Italiane.Google Scholar
Watts, Richard. 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wieting, Stephen G. 2015. The Sociology of Hypocrisy: An Analysis of Sport and Religion. London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa, and Joan Manes. 1980. “The Compliment as a Social Strategy.” Papers in Linguistics: International Journal of Human Communication 13 (3): 391–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zagorin, Perez. 1990. Ways of Lying. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Qiao, 1998. “Fuzziness–Vagueness–Generality–Ambiguity.” Journal of Pragmatics 29: 13–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar