> If tolerance is a peace treaty, then it's easy to argue that the slightest breach of the peace merits the severest response Certainly some will act that way,

> If tolerance is a peace treaty, then it's easy to argue that the slightest breach of the peace merits the severest response Certainly some will act that way, but I don't think it necessarily follows. The definition he provides of tolerance rather matches my own intuition when it comes to the mundane form of "tolerance" that neighbors show to one another when putting up with each others quirks. But in any case, my point is that Zunger's character is irrelevant to whether any particular idea he happens to espouse is good or not. We must judge the idea on its own merits. To judge the idea based on what we think of Zunger himself is to engage in an fallacy.