Discussion (13)¬

1. A paradox of liberalism: can you tolerate the intolerant? Or, occasionally, the intolerable.

2. If I say something you don’t like I am exercising my right to free speech and must be respected and tolerated. If you say something I don’t like you are engaging in hate speech and must be silenced using the full powers of the state. I think I got that right.

3. Quine: that’s not a paradox at all. Tolerance is an agreement, not a commandment. It’s a mutually beneficial truce. Break the truce, and the agreement’s off. We should give each other the benefit of the doubt, but beyond that, reason recommends reciprocity.

4. Paradoctor: I can tolerate that opinion, for now.

   I think. It depends.

5. Bvereshagen: You talking to me?

6. Problem is, the intolerant are more likely to win. Tolerant people are more inclined to give in a bit on the demands of the intolerant (“Okay, if I can please them by (not) doing this or that, why not?”).
   Then, the situation, moved a bit more to the side of the intolerant, becomes the new normal and the intolerant start making new demands. Rinse and repeat…

7. Nassim Nicholas Taleb had some things to say about The Dictatorship of the Small Minority.

8. jb:
   After reading that I almost want to ban kosher halal & non-GMO food.

9. James:

   you got the tiger by the tail: “ALMOST” …..

10. The intolerant, and the unethical in general, always have a tactical advantage. The tolerant and ethical have the strategic advantage. Therefore the issue is decided on logistics, i.e. reason.

11. paradoctor:
    I fear you are too optimistic, but I pray you are right.
    Up to you to determine the value of prayer by an atheist….

12. Dr John the Wipper, https://www.pinterest.com/pin/99008891793000110/

13. Freedom of Speech? The only people who seem to be allowed to spout absolute shite, are those projecting their particular religious dogma from the pulpit…how dare you castigate x – thats his religious right and he’s backed up by god you foolish non believer you…..