• teamevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    25 days ago

    The paradox of intolerance is not a paradox. Tolerance is a social contract, folks who demand us tolerate intolerance are violating the social contract and should be ignored.

    • rsuri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      I’d argue it’s not a paradox because it relies on two different definitions of tolerance.

      • Tolerance 1: Intolerant opinions should be allowed to exist without criminal punishment.
      • Tolerance 2: Everyone should treat intolerant opinions like other opinions for the purposes of platforming, how you feel about the speaker, etc.

      Tolerance 1 is basically the kind of free speech principles adopted by most democratic societies and is probably necessary for such societies to remain free. Tolerance 2 is just silly. If you’re in a forum specifically for debating deplorable opinions, fine. But there’s no reason that a politics forum needs to cater to deplorable opinions.

    • MetaCubed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      Sorry, tone doesn’t come across well. I can’t tell if you’re trying to correct me on a point, because I agree with you.

        • xenoclast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          25 days ago

          Big aside:Maaaaaan, I catch myself doing this all the time. Posting what I think is :yes, and… But people don’t realize that and think I’m disagreeing… and then much confusion ensues.

          Tldr, I gotta stop assuming shit and be better at setting context…

          • Charapaso@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            25 days ago

            I’ve just realized that my tendency to start comments irl and online with “Yeah…” might in part be a defense mechanism to avoid being misunderstood as disagreeing.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      25 days ago

      “Paradox” doesn’t mean it’s impossible to resolve. Mathematical paradoxes, such as Gabriel’s Horn (a horn that takes up finite volume, yet you would not be able to paint it) or the Banach–Tarski paradox (where you can take a sphere, break it apart, and reassemble it into two spheres identical to the original), do have resolutions. They’re just not obvious and can be hard to get your head around.

      The original Greek word directly translates to “against belief”, and basically means something unexpected. It doesn’t mean it’s logically contradictory, just that it might seem to.

      So yes, the Paradox of Tolerance is a paradox. It’s not obvious to all people what the resolution is, but explaining it as a peace treaty rather than an unchangeable moral imperative tends to work.