If a person prescribed themselves a set of what is morally allowable, and that set was larger than what they prescribed to other people, I would call that person a "hypocrite".
- For example, suppose Johnny chooses to eat ice cream, showing that eating ice cream is in his set of morally allowable actions, but then he tells others it is wrong to eat ice cream. So his set of morally allowable actions is larger than others, making him a hypocrite.
If a person prescribed themselves a set of what is morally allowable, and that set was exactly the same size as what they prescribed to other people, I would call that person "morally consistent" or something like that.
- For example, Johnny has chosen to eat ice cream and he tells others it is fine to eat ice cream.
Finally, and this is my question, what if a person prescribes for themselves a set of what is morally allowable, and that set is smaller than what they prescribe for others?
- For example, Johnny feels like it would be wrong for him to eat ice cream, but he tells others it is fine to eat ice cream.
What would I call this person?
- Principled? But that won't highlight the imbalance here.
- Inconsistent? Irrational? Self-loathing? Those seem to give a unneeded negative connotation.
- Isolationist? Empathetic? Morally generous? Convicted?