The paradox of tolerance is based
| You’re getting at a truth, but you shouldn’t have ‘paradoxes’ in your thoughts IMO. Fighting for tolerance doesn’t make sense, because you’re literally fighting to tolerate anything. What you really support is sexual liberality, racial integration, anti-anti-communism, things like that. You call them tolerance, but you don’t support them because of tolerance itself, but other reasons.
| Imagine someone who fought for tolerance of slavery, Hitler, and Mormon/Muslim one man owning a bunch of women relationships. And then cited paradox of tolerance to attack feminism/abolitionism/antihitler. They would be correct- you can’t have a society which is safe and tolerant of two different view points (this is the truth within the paradox of tolerance) but they also aren’t really fighting for tolerance, but specific views, and against enemies.
| Someone who actually lived out the paradox of tolerance would probably want everyone to be totally powerless, maybe imprisoned by an AI, or in solitary confinement or something, so that they could think all kinds of things without being a threat to be attacked. If you give people any power, tolerance for its own sake becomes a problem, because you will be destroyed.
| I support tolerance as a tactical move, in general, because it means avoiding insane tortures by authoritarians, and gives people the ability to understand their world and advocate for themselves, but when I attack enemies, I’m attacking tolerance (for those enemies) because I have to sacrifice tolerance for my other values, not because I’m secretly defending it.
| >>1103253
>the trve vision of a perfect world is basically vrchat but on a cosmic scale
i do agree with this actually
| I don't think we should. B)
Refresh
| Tolerating the intolerant is the big gay. If we could get rid of the intolerant our lives would greatly improve.