Picture this: In high school, you believed in utter nonsense, and espoused as if it were gospel. You thought nothing could make you change your mind. Then you go off to college and surround yourself with people from different backgrounds. Or maybe you looked up some facts about your position, learned about the counter-position, and realized maybe, just maybe, you don't agree with your original point of view. Or maybe you still believe it, but for different reasons. So now, maybe after some time and research and thinking, you agree with the position opposite of what you used to believe.

Congratulations. You are now a hypocrite.

At least, you would be one to some people on the Internet who have pigeonholed themselves into an echo chamber. You know.,,.the people who will block you on social media for even thinking in a slightly different way from them. The people who will do hit piece after hit piece about people who do the things they claim to hate, only to be silent when it is someone on their side is doing it too.

To understand the difference between the two concepts, we have to look at what it means to be a hypocrite. A hypocrite follows the mantra of "do as I say, not as I do." A hypocrite will virtue signal and try to look like a moral and righteous person, but will not act accordingly.

The problem with conflating the two is that people like to look at any given thought, statement, action, in a bubble, and then use to extrapolate back in time to try and determine how someone felt and acted throughout the course of their lifetime. This, of course, is a dangerous way of thinking that strips out any human potential. It also divides us further than we need to be and creates an "us v them" mentality.

With growth, you can see lifelong Democrats who have become fed up with the leftward leap that the party has taken (into insane and impractical territory) and have decided to walk away. The same is true going the other way. Believe it or not, Cenk Uygur, the founder of The Young Turks Network on YouTube and the former head of the Justice Democrats, used to be a Republican. I wouldn't be so quick to say he has been hypocritical about certain stances.

On the other hand, I would be quick to point out hypocrisy if it were over the span of hours, days, or any other short-term time period. Going back to The Young Turks, Ana Kasparian takes the cake with this. Remember in 2016 before the RNC, when she was openly against fat shaming, only to yell "Get off the stage you fat f***!" at Infowars founder Alex Jones? Or, going back just a little further, when Barack Obama railed against both Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney for suggesting Russia should not be trusted, only to sing that EXACT same tune as soon as Donald Trump was elected? Yes, both sides do it, with conservatives being hypocritical mostly in regards to free speech.

It is easy to see why growth and hypocrisy are used interchangeably.

What is hard to see is why we can't give anyone the benefit of the doubt when it comes to growing. Growth is a sign of maturity. Growth, even if it involves changing a position, requires honesty with yourself. Growth is admitting to being wrong and then living your life to the way you see the world. Hypocrisy involves dishonesty or even a sense of undeserved moral superiority. It involves arrogance. Above all, it involves living in a tribalist bubble where no one thinks or reacts to things differently from you.

Both are part of human nature. One is laudable, while the other is contemptible. Which side would you rather be on?