It was pointed out to me a while back that the paradox of tolerance is only a paradox if you consider tolerance to be a philosophical position.
In fact, we don’t treat it like that. We treat it as a social contract, in which context it is no paradox at all to say that if you aren’t tolerant then other people aren’t obliged to tolerate you in turn
You don’t tolerate it…? Is this supposed to be a trick question? Sometimes when you don’t tolerate something, you are largely powerless against it and it still happens. Sucks, but that’s life. You don’t have to roll over and present your balls to the bat though.
Tolerance paradoxically demands intolerance of the intolerant.
It was pointed out to me a while back that the paradox of tolerance is only a paradox if you consider tolerance to be a philosophical position.
In fact, we don’t treat it like that. We treat it as a social contract, in which context it is no paradox at all to say that if you aren’t tolerant then other people aren’t obliged to tolerate you in turn
This here - the social contract view needs to be widely adopted
It’s not really a paradox when you think about it. In fact, it’s absolutely necessary.
Curious. How does that work when someone is beating you with a baseball bat or robbing you?
You don’t tolerate it…? Is this supposed to be a trick question? Sometimes when you don’t tolerate something, you are largely powerless against it and it still happens. Sucks, but that’s life. You don’t have to roll over and present your balls to the bat though.