
Paradox of Tolerance - vermilingua
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
======
wrsh07
The best essay I've seen on this "paradox" is by Yonatan Zunger:
[https://extranewsfeed.com/tolerance-is-not-a-moral-
precept-1...](https://extranewsfeed.com/tolerance-is-not-a-moral-
precept-1af7007d6376)

An excerpt:

> Tolerance is not a moral absolute; it is a peace treaty. Tolerance is a
> social norm because it allows different people to live side-by-side without
> being at each other’s throats.

Note the full essay is well worth reading.

------
superdisk
Citing this "paradox" is a great way to shut down discussion by claiming the
other person is being intolerant. Basically the only time I've ever seen this
invoked is on Reddit in a dishonest way.

~~~
throwaway29102
I’ve only ever invoked it against neo-neo-Nazis and conspiracy theorists
demanding to be taken seriously.

Would you call that dishonest?

~~~
BitwiseFool
Yes, because the dishonest part is the how often those labels are thrown
around with no real basis.

~~~
wishinghand
I've seen it used against people spouting QAnon, Big Pharma mind control
vaccine theories and support for fascist elements of various governments like
USA, China, Turkey, Russia, and Poland. Seems appropriate to me. It's not
healthy to tolerate these folks, especially the fascists.

------
chasing
The word "intolerant" has an implied "of [x]" — when progressives use the term
the implied bit is usually "of minorities," or "of trans people," "of women in
tech" or something like that. When I call Trump "intolerant," that's generally
what I mean, for example.

But of course one can try to be very tolerant about those things and still be
"intolerant." I'm intolerant of poison. Just don't like it! I'm intolerant of
manipulative assholes. I'm intolerant of people who greedily ignore the health
and safety of those around them. Etc.

Some people are very invested in everyone forgetting the "of [x]" bit that
comes after "intolerant" because it allows them to make the argument that
society has to accept them no matter how horribly they behave. It does not.

~~~
perlpimp
Society is defined to similar values where they can drive progress towards a
common goal, when values diverge completely where some say family construct is
no more valid and should be abolished and others see it as central construct
for a healthy society to exist and 'tolerance/intolerance' there is no society
anymore.

Open minds and progress forward(in minds) what defines a healthy society,
delineation a thin line between tolerance/intolerance - where war is already
lost, openness and freedom to discuss any ideas is where progress is made.

This is what it was in soviet russia and politburo dispensing viewpoints
anyone having any other ideas was to be force-reeducated. Anyone doing too
well etc. etc.

------
jeffreyrogers
The only time I've seen someone bring this up in real life is to shut down
someone else they disagree with.

------
edna314
Tolerance is not a good thing. If you see something which you think isn’t
right you should speak up and not just tolerate it. It’s weird that tolerance
is connected with the peaceful coexistence of two groups of people. As if this
was the only way. People coexist peacefully because it’s the reasonable thing
to do, not because they exercise tolerance.

~~~
ksdale
Sometimes people coexist peacefully despite thinking the other person is
wrong. Sometimes speaking up about things you think are wrong precludes
peaceful coexistence, and in those cases, peaceful coexistence is indeed the
exercise of tolerance.

~~~
edna314
I think the latter case is not a solution to the problem, but rather a form of
procrastination. Instead of trying figure out how to resolve the issues in a
peaceful way, you declare peace and hope for the best. Doesn’t work in the
long run. Of course you can buy time by declaring peace to figure things out
and for that tolerance is useful, but it is certainly not the most important
thing that assures peaceful coexistence. Any peace it would bring is too
fragile. Reason gives you permanent peace.

