Scot HackerBest explanation I've seen of why the Paradox of Tolerance is no paradox at all.
GrayGooGirl 🏳️🌈@shacker
I don't think this stands up to scrutiny. If the only reason to not tolerating intolerance is that it violates the social contract, then by extension we shouldn't tolerate anything that violates the social contract, which makes the people who set policies about what is socially acceptable able to dictate who should or shouldn't be tolerated. This is why queer folk have suffered ostracization and demonization for so long. You can't really divorce ethics from tolerance.
I don't think this stands up to scrutiny. If the only reason to not tolerating intolerance is that it violates the social contract, then by extension we shouldn't tolerate anything that violates the social contract, which makes the people who set policies about what is socially acceptable able to dictate who should or shouldn't be tolerated. This is why queer folk have suffered ostracization and demonization for so long. You can't really divorce ethics from tolerance.
Ostrich@graygoogirl @shacker Yes, and what exactly is the social contract? In a fascist society, the contract is that you must maintain loyalty to the state and constantly prove it with service and sacrifice. By the standard set forth in this thread, fascism would be "tolerant".
Tolerance is by definition unconditional, and a society that faces no paradox of tolerance is probably neither free nor just.
Tracy Hall@ostrich @graygoogirl @shacker
you are pedantically changing the definition. The "social contract" of tolerance is ONLY the agreement to tolerate EACH OTHER. Your definition of "acceptance" is an example of NOT tolerating, and is thus completely irrelevant.
The point is that the ideal of tolerance is NOT a suicide pact.
@video_manager @graygoogirl @shacker It's not pedantry, it's a very important line to understand the shape of. The idea of conditional basic rights colors a lot of informal systems of oppression right now- especially the kinds that kill sex workers, trans folks, and folks of color. The idea that we can look the other way when people are raped in prison if they were "bad enough" is part and parcel of rights and tolerance being part of a breachable "contract".
@video_manager It's a shame that you're not trying to understand what I'm saying and instead jump straight to dismissing what I'm saying as bad faith.
I understand precisely what you're talking about, and you are changing the subject to force discussion of it. Lack of acceptance IS NOT TOLERANCE which is the POINT of the OP.
I'm sure you WANT to discuss a different, broader social evil. Respectable. But that is NOT this discussion.
@video_manager There was never a discussion here about the line between "tolerance" and "acceptance", and that also is not objectively definite for everyone. Can a tolerant society refuse to protect marginalized groups from discrimination in employment, housing, education, and healthcare? Can a tolerant society force you to bake a birthday cake for Hitler?
Please. Read something beyond philosophy 101.
Answer is blatantly "no"; you know it, and you want to derail for your pedantic games. Go away.