I'm sick and tired of idealogues who, having nothing concrete to say against their opponents' arguments, attack them on the basis of hypocrisy, as if that were tantamount to proving them wrong. It's the worst sort of ad-hominem attack, if you ask me-- it in effect concedes the argument, or at best avoids it in favour of pointing out how bad the person making it is.
And the worst is that the accuser isn't even doing that, oh no! Why, that would be absolutist, and wrong. It is, after all, just as morally valid to mutilate women's genitalia as it is to educate women and raise them to be independent, critical thinkers. No, we're just pointing out how our opponent is being inconsistent.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by
little statesmen and philosophers and divines.
- R.W. Emerson
Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes
- W. Whitman
Little minds are consistent amongst foolish hobgoblins
- My Favourite Misquote of Emerson