3 ms·

For those who may strongly disagree with that statement, I would be curious to hear their counter argument to the paradox of tolerance. https://en.wikipedia.or

• AnHonestComment 6y ago
  How does being intolerant in response help? This is just a false dichotomy (intolerance or nothing!) to justify intolerance as a valid political tactic. But if intolerance is valid as a response to intolerance, why isn’t intolerance acceptable as a general political tool? You’ve abandoned principle for the logic equivalent of Three Card Monty. tl;dr: The “paradox” isn’t, it’s just a false dichotomy.
• noctua 6y ago
  I don't support free speech myself, but I guess it would be that the whole premise is wrong. To think he's right you need to believe that certain speech leads to violence or hatred and that trying to suppress that speech prevents violence and hatred. And even if speech can lead to violence and hatred, some could argue that it's not enough to justify taking away someone's individual freedoms. Like how someone not being able to responsibly drink alcohol isn't a good justification to take away my right to drink it. If you commit violence because of intoxication, you'll get punished for the violence. But it's not a good reason to take away my right to drink alcohol.