3 ms·
Sure, mainstream opinions may be wrong, that often happens. However, they're still mainstream opinions, not a few rare extremists that can be just pushed out to
by PeterisP 5y ago
Sure, mainstream opinions may be wrong, that often happens. However, they're still mainstream opinions, not a few rare extremists that can be just pushed out to edges and excluded. So you can disagree with their wrong opinions, and work to change their mind, but until they do - and even if they don't - in the workplace, you have to be able to work together with people strongly holding those wrong opinions; however wrong these peoople are, they should have equal rights to you. (I mean, weren't you also suggesting throwing out some people off workplaces because of their views?)
And one definitely can advocate for tolerance for the intolerant as well - IIRC Jefferson explitly argued that we should, Popper argues that it won't turn out well and we shouldn't, I'd probably argue for something like John Rawl's position which is essentially tolerance up until actual imminent threat to physical security or perserveration of key institutions, i.e. intolerance of intolerant only as an extraordinary measure, but there are many reasonable arguments about this, there's no consensus agreement on any solution to the paradox of tolerance.
- GeneralMayhem 5y agoYou're conflating the practical and the moral. In practice, yes, you often have to hold your nose and work with all manner of odious people. That doesn't mean that that's the way it should be, or that those people are just as right. The ideal would be for such people not to exist, and we have to figure out how to get along in a world where they do; I think that's qualitatively different, even if we end up with roughly the same practical day-to-day experience either way. Tolerance doesn't mean acceptance or celebration.