Should intolerance be tolerated?

ToleratingIntolerance

Paradox of intolerance:

The paradox of tolerance, first described by Karl Popper in 1945, is a decision theory paradox. The paradox states that if a society is tolerant without limit, their ability to be tolerant will eventually be seized or destroyed by the intolerant.

Popper came to the seemingly paradoxical conclusion that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

29 Comments

  1. Corky

     /  August 19, 2017

    Karl never was great on looking around the room. He preferred looking out the window.

    ”Popper came to the seemingly paradoxical conclusion that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.”

    The first critique of that statement should be quite obvious. The second critique I would add:

    Intolerance isn’t a problem. Intolerance has hurt no man. But acting on intolerance has killed billions throughout mankinds history.

    I don’t care how intolerant people are in private.. I care when they act on that intolerance outside of their private lives to the detriment of those they intolerant too.

    Karl should have made his mind up: Is he intolerant of peoples thought processes, or peoples actions?

    • Gezza

       /  August 19, 2017

      Intolerance isn’t a problem. Intolerance has hurt no man. But acting on intolerance has killed billions throughout mankinds history.

      Once enough people have been taught to be intolerant in private that is sufficient for those who act on intolerance to kill their victims in the billions because those who are privately intolerant see no need to stop them.

      • Patzcuaro

         /  August 19, 2017

        Exactly they get accustom to being intolerant and it, intolerance, becomes the norm for them.

        • Corky

           /  August 19, 2017

          You must provide a link between intolerance and acting on intolerance. That link doesn’t exist. The best you can allude to is a tenuous link as a precursor to action…

          This is where things get tricky. The government must step in. However, what if the government is intolerant and is prepared to act on that bias?

          There’s only one way around that dilemma- a constitution. A constitution that allows every mans his right to intolerance. But doesn’t allow him to act on that intolerance.

  2. artcroft

     /  August 19, 2017

    Good. Let’s start with a doctrine test for muslims. Do you support western sexual ethics including gay marriage? If they don’t then …we….? Hmmm tricky.

    I know let’s start with a doctrinal question for Daoists instead. They’re a much smaller and already marginal group.

    Now I just need a list of all the Daoist in NZ. Be convenient if they wore some regalia that marked them out. How about a yellow star?

    • Corky

       /  August 19, 2017

      Arty, I like your identity paradigm re Daosits juxtaposed with a hint of Jewish history to show the hypocrisy and convolutions of our procedural processes.

  3. Maggy Wassilieff

     /  August 19, 2017

    Karl Popper wrote of the paradox of tolerance in The Open Society and its Enemies while working at Canterbury College (University), Christchurch.

    Such a pity NZ did not hold onto this great man.
    https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/4p18/popper-karl-raimund

  4. An old saying often quoted applies here: “don’t keep your minds so open that your brains fall out!”

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  August 19, 2017

      I suspect that we all know people who do.

      Or whose minds are so closed that nothing can get IN.

  5. Kitty Catkin

     /  August 19, 2017

    I once knew a man who was so bloody ‘tolerant’ that he made everyone else seem INtolerant. I remember that he and a friend and I were somewhere like the Botanic Gardens and that the friend and I were saying which roses we liked-I liked the pink, he liked red. Mr Tolerant unctuously made this seem as if expressing different opinions was a sign of intolerance, even of rose colours when the discussion was purely about personal preference and just a casual conversation.’We all like different things (and have to respect each other’s blah blah blah).’ If we had been abusive of each other’s favourite rose colours, he might have had a point. He was a real conversation killer. And a pain in the bum.

    • Brown

       /  August 20, 2017

      He sounds like my step daughter.

    • I know send avoid the type 😫

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  August 20, 2017

        This bloke was the worst one. Who else could make two people saying which roses they liked seem like an argument ?

  6. Kevin

     /  August 19, 2017

    John Stuart Mill believed that we should be allowed to do whatever we want so long as we didn’t harm others. However he made one exception – no one should be allowed to choose to become a slave. In other word we have the freedom to do what we want but not the freedom to give up our freedom.

  7. sorethumb

     /  August 19, 2017

    In the above example we make an assumption as to who is the intolerant and who is the (otherwise) tolerant?

    • PDB

       /  August 19, 2017

      That’s the real question – who gets to decide what is intolerable? Knowing Nazi Germany to be evil is easy but the real issue comes when the so-called intolerance isn’t so clear cut & open to debate.

      Who then becomes the judge, jury and executioner?

      • Missy

         /  August 20, 2017

        Exactly, and at the moment it seems the left have appointed themselves judge, jury, and executioner – just look at AntiFa, and Momentum here in the UK. So who then becomes judge, jury, and executioner when they become so intolerant and so far to the left they have met the far right (if they have not already).

        • Brown

           /  August 20, 2017

          This reflects the human condition. When oblivious to an imposed natural order of things outside our own creation we will seek to justify whatever takes our fancy no matter how awful or stupid it may be.

      • Blazer

         /  August 20, 2017

        the strongest power…thats who.

  8. Alan Wilkinson

     /  August 20, 2017

    Our problem is that we have allowed govt to progress beyond outlawing harm to outlawing the risk of harm. That allows them to control and outlaw everything since everything carries some risk.

  9. sorethumb

     /  August 20, 2017

    Melanie Phillips: How totalitarianism is winning in the west
    “A white supremacist called Richard Spencer invented the blanket term ‘alt-right’ to associate his ilk with conservatives seeking merely to defend American identity and core values. Through this tactic, Spencer intended to boost the far right and simultaneously smear and thus destroy regular conservatives.
    “The left has seized upon this smear with unbridled joy, routinely using the‘alt-right’ term to try to destroy the national identity agenda by bracketing it with white supremacism. The result is a powerful boost for the far right. From deserved obscurity, they suddenly find the left are transmitting their every utterance to the world. The phrase “useful idiots” comes inescapably to mind.”
    http://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.co.nz/2017/08/melanie-phillips-how-totalitarianism-is.html

    I couldn’t for the life of me see why there would be a rise in support for the discredited KKK and Nazis when there was a groundswell that got Trump elected?

  10. Zedd

     /  August 20, 2017

    depends on who you put the labels on; why is a maori party accepted, but not a european uni-students union

    • Black lives matter?

    • PDB

       /  August 20, 2017

      Blacks can never be racist because they can hide behind centuries of being oppressed.

      Case in point – South Africa & Zimbabwe are undoubtedly racist against Whites but are largely ignored by anti-racism campaigners.

  11. unitedtribes2

     /  August 20, 2017

    The left in USA are intolerant of anyone but them winning an election. Now their acting on it. Cant say but I will be surprised if this leeds to more tolerance

  1. Should intolerance be tolerated? — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition