5 ms·
In order to be tolerant we must remove everyone that does not agree
by disgruntled101 6y ago
In order to be tolerant we must remove everyone that does not agree
- foobiter 6y agotolerance generally excludes the intolerant, yes
- finikytou 6y agoplease explain to us where it stops. For instance lets say I find it toxic to use comma in sentences. how many people do I need to find that agree with me on this before I can ban you from hacker news for toxicity?
- leg100 6y agoWell you both seem to think it's acceptable to start a sentence with a lower case letter, so I think you'll get along just fine.
- sshine 6y agoshouldnt there have been a comma after “well”?
- dnh44 6y agoI sort of agree with you on the comma thing; reducing usage of commas while using more semicolons would make for better reading.
- bioinformatics 6y agoI usually don't like people that don't use a full stop at the end of sentences ...
- foobiter 6y agothis is a very obvious strawman... if you’ve been treating people poorly for decades you too may discover that publicly playing devils advocate for a convicted rapist may be the final straw.
- auiya 6y agoComma usage, pedophilia endorsement, it's all basically the same.
- brayhite 6y agoIt stops when folks stop focusing on a singular angle to create arguments in bad faith. There’s a thousand examples of behavior that shouldn’t be tolerated that at some point in the last 200 years, society tolerated. Likewise, there’s a thousand examples of behavior that wasn’t tolerated by society that we by and large think should be tolerated. But instead of talking about the merits of the behavior, folks want to throw out the “tolerance” card. You want that to stop? Then stop.
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago> But instead of talking about the merits of the behavior, folks want to throw out the “tolerance” card. I don't think it works this way. When Selam Gano wrote her original hate piece, she concluded that people like Stallman need to be removed, and if necessary, MIT should be burned to the ground. What people? "Jeffrey Epstein. Marvin Minsky. Richard Stallman." The sentence has been passed. She didn't demand an apology or a change of behavior. She wanted punishment. By putting Minsky next to Epstein, and Stallman next to Minsky, she wanted to create the impression that somehow the terrible monster, the AI pioneer and the founder of the GNU project are same kind of terrible scum that needs to be completely removed to make the world better.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y agoThe Paradox of Tolerance is mentioned every time when an intolerant hypocrite wants to paint himself as a tolerant person.
- foobar33333 6y agoIsn't the problem with RMS that he is too tolerant? He is tolerant of people we find bad.
- abracadaniel 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- xlwqnt 6y agoWritten in 1945, literally as a reaction to actual Nazism. Now used as a cudgel to intimidate and harass everyone who does not follow the party line. Often the harassers profit financially from their bigotry, which makes them gigantic hypocrites.
- gkagel 6y agoPopper would not have approved anything that happened in that cancel discussion. Popper knew things like forgiveness, not taking single statements out of context, not reading too much into statements, not misquoting people and much more. Please do not associate Popper with mob justice. He would have despised the mob.
- silicon2401 6y agoThis is why "tolerance" basically doesn't exist. Nobody's truly tolerant, they're just tolerant or intolerant towards some particular combination of things.
- BoardsOfCanada 6y agoI can tolerate anything except the outgroup!