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.
