Deep Down We Cant Fool Even Ourselves Article Review

4th May 2011
In Bloom’s hierarchy of different levels of thinking, the first stage is evaluation. This stage involves decision making is done after having understood the concept or the context of concern. In the John Mc Cain’s statement apart from being hypocritical we can say that he made his decision without evaluation this means that Mc Cain did not take into account of the help he might need from the poor thus could make such a statement and later calls the poor people to vote for him. To president Obama, we can say he is biting the hand that fed him. Initially he was financed by very many people and even himself he admitted to this. Can we say that people do forget this fat especially when you think that you do not dearly need the support of somebody? This proves to be the case. However those who act this way do not evaluate to find the meaning in whatever they are saying. We ca not fool ourselves that we care about others only we are in need!
Just like Obama’s, Mc Cains , the governor of new York should put into considerations that we are all human beings and are bound to fall to situations we may not expect. Thus we are called to be understanding to our fellow human beings. By being found in a situation that you first condemn implies that before opening mouth to condemn others, you don’t consider what could have fixed people in the situation.
In the second stage of the hierarchy, there is synthesis of values and ideas. It involves combining information for and coming up with totally a new product. This requires creativity and originality. This is what the two psychologist used to show an understanding to why the two i.e. Obama and Mc Cain could have made them to make such statements. The use of two different scenarios to depict or to explain the concept of moral hypocrisy can be termed as synthesis of the situation. The psychologists sat down and thought over the issue in details and came up with a way of depicting how double moral standards can come to exist in people.
Analyzing the statements of these people will require identification of the components. This means that you have to go deeper than the words suggests. Thus it calls for the understanding of the situation, reasons and the social position of the people. Despite the fact that people derive such statements deep from their hearts, sometimes they are forced to apply such lies to get through. In Obama’s case for instance could he be trying to save the American citizens from imposters who may come in the name of politics? Could he be seeing a serious challenge in someone whom he knows very well can not fund his own campaigns and that his campaigns could be at stake should he or she fails to be supported? Analysis also goes for the advantages and disadvantages of such statements. The major thing that most politicians are for is their success. If at all they can use their double standards well to give a concrete explanation which will make them excel, it is well and good but if things go the other way round like in the Mc Cains case it will mess the politician.
The hierarchy calls for correct application of information, ideas. This involves putting the theories into practice. Politicians can successfully manage the people by using the information they have accordingly. This means that with the coming of ideas he or she can easily manipulate the words in action to suit his or her desires. Thus the correct understanding and meaning of such hypocritical statements by politicians always land them in the correct action to take.
When the politicians are able to, paraphrase and memorize whatever they have been saying to different people, we can say he comprehends whatever he is talking about. This calls for no contradiction in the usage of language. It requires that people to restate whatever they meant be it in to the same audience or different audiences. Thus this instills in people a sense of truthfulness which politicians have used to sail through. At the ground level, may not understand and in fact they will believe in whatever they will be told. Thus in a way this accounts for the success of politicians. This implies that for the success of politicians they must be able to paraphrase what they say. So if Mc Cain for instance is able to clarify his point in a way that people could understand, then it is likely to mean that his values as a leader can still hold.
Lastly in understanding leadership, people are required to be knowledgeable. In the first place, politicians do well understand the way in which the masses are able to react against they double moral statements. With such understanding they are likely to convince people that they are right just like the New York governor did.