Hypocrisy within Biological and Non-Biological Systems

Parameters of Modern Hypocrisy can propagate by hierarchical layers in Biological and Non-Biological Systems. Decision-makers in hierarchical layers would underestimate Social Complexity and vulnerability within the context of self-righteousness.

Two identical arrays of Hypocrisy Process Modes exist within Biological and Non-Biological Systems. Hypocrisy can be either unintentional or intentional in Decision Making Process. 

Hypocrisy Instinct can activate in the Biological System when two contradictory Instincts are unlike a programming algorithm. Two Instances can appear on a collision course in Decision-Making Process.

The hypocrisy paradigm can propagate in the Non-Biological System when contradictory allocates between Global Strategies. Other circumstances of deceits are critical political economy, hidden overhead costs, and unexpected phenomena and changes in internal and external system platforms. Deceptions are explored as a tactic consciously and intentionally for pretending a false allegation against opponents. This type of Moral Hypocrisy restrains in this case study.

Predators can activate and launch the Paradox of unintentional Hypocrisy during hunting. For example, a lioness adopted a baby antelope like one of her cubs after suffocating the baby antelope’s mother. Because of the forceful Motherly Instinct, the lioness took care of the baby antelope, and the Killer Instinct can be erased in the Decision Pattern. Two contradictory Instincts confronted over sending a signal in the Conscious Component. Forceful Instinct can frequently defeat Powerless Instinct during Instincts Confrontation in Consciousness. A collision course between two contradictory Instincts reduces Harmonic Balance in the Conscious Component. Lionesses can face mental illness or perpetuate the cycle of deprivation if the Motherly Instinct becomes remarkably more robust than the Wild Instinct (the Killer Instinct). Baby Antelope thought that the lioness was her mother. Baby antelope went between the lioness’s legs like it was trying to get milk. A lioness was confused and stood before a baby antelope for 45 minutes. At this juncture, two contradictory Instincts confront the lioness’ Consciousness. A gesture of baby antelope near the lioness’ legs modifies and fortifies Motherly Instinct. 

The lifestyle can cause insincerity in family structure and individuals in Social Contexts. For example, individuals who used to eat meat for their entire lives suddenly believed that eating animal products goes far beyond personal choices. This phenomenon can be identified as a lifestyle of falsity. In extreme cases, people can face the cycle of deprivation when the Instinctive Eating Principle and Social Instinct program are on a collision course. Internal deceptiveness can propagate unintentionally in the Conscious Component and inactivate the Empathic Instinct. Internal Deceit can cause Open-loop Cycles in specific Instances and severe depression in Biological Systems.

Modern Deceit as an input generates and propagates through hierarchical layers. Big Corporations (BC) can articulate strategic planning concerning competitiveness in a Competitive World (CW). 

Strategic parameters in big corporations modify Strategic parameters in a Competitive World. 

Big Corporations would hardly devote time to measuring the side effects of Strategic Planning and possible Hypocrisy Patterns in a Competitive World because of cost-effectiveness, future self-generated thoughts, and integrated strategies. Besides, Algorithmic Models beyond Global Variables are unpredictable and volatile in making new strategies. (Fig 1)

BC + CW = the first cycle of Hypocrisy in the Competitive World (invisible)

New Strategic Planning Parameters in a Competitive World can demand Global Variables (GV) Modifications. System Owner modifies Strategic Parameters in Global Variables for aligning new Strategic Planning Parameters from the Competitive World. 

CW + GV = the second cycle of Hypocrisy in Global Variables (invisible)

The system Owner needs to align and optimize the second cycle of Hypocrisy in Global Variables within Social Contexts. An instance of the second cycle of Deceit modifies parameters in Social Contexts (SC).

GV + SC = the third cycle of Hypocrisy in Social Context (invisible)

An instance of the third cycle of Hypocrisy in Social Contexts modifies Biological and Non-Biological Systems.

Biological Systems try to adopt the third cycle of Hypocrisy from Social Contexts. New Deceit may require activating certain Instincts and inactivating other Instincts. This procedure can cause a collision course between two Contradictory Instincts (CI) in the Subconscious Component. Eventually, the fourth cycle of Hypocrisy in Biological Systems retreats modified parameters from Subconsciousness to Social Contexts. Multiple Hypocritical parameters in Social Contexts can perpetuate the evolutionary path of life. (Fig 1)

SC + CI = the fourth cycle of Hypocrisy in Subconsciousness (invisible)

CI + SC = the fifth cycle of Hypocrisy in Social Contexts (invisible)

Structural codes show object-oriented design patterns in Non-Biological Systems. Object-oriented design patterns can formalize goals and tackle real-world situations to solve problems. It discusses complicated technical issues for the construction framework.

Hypocrisy in Social Contexts modifies object-oriented design patterns and instances of source codes. Complicated source codes adjust system operations, and they cause complexity in Biological and Non-Biological Systems.

                                                                          

Observation:

Hypocrisy in Biological Systems and Bugs in Source Code in Non-Biological Systems have a good analogy. Because a Hypocrisy Instinct instantiates in Biological Systems because of a suboptimal control framework (Contradictory Algorithms among Instincts). Bugs in source code occur in a program due to mistakes of System Programmers or Principles of Algorithm Design.  

 

Observation:

An acceptable Operational System requires optimal strategic planning for system maintenance. Optimal maintenance policies can handle internal and external complexity and enhance performance. Decent maintainability and accuracy for a sustainable framework can require appropriate economic impact. However, an optimal operation has high costs of maintenance. Systems Owners tend to rationalize operational costs by focusing on preservation. Reducing operations and maintenance costs can cause a defect in system performance because parameters in the operating system would be on a collision course with Global Strategic Planning for regular system maintenance. Internal and external customers might capture parameters of Deception.

Observation:

The paradox between Global Strategic Planning and Operational systems illustrates something far beyond Hypocrisy. Global Strategic Planning modifies source codes and programming patterns.