3 ms·
I think it’s the definition of “intolerable” in the above statement where there’s a problem. Who decides the basis for intolerance? More importantly, who would
by vnchr 4y ago
I think it’s the definition of “intolerable” in the above statement where there’s a problem. Who decides the basis for intolerance? More importantly, who would influence the definition of intolerance for their own ends? How do we coexist when my intolerance is different than your intolerance? What do I do when you decide I’m intolerable?
- angst_ridden 4y agoExactly. That's a problem. For example, I'm in favor of banning speech exhorting folks to violence against people of any specific race/religion/ethnicity/orientation/belief. That seems like a simple enough restriction. But then, in the event of a law like that being passed, the advocates of violence switch their tactic to explaining why said target group is subhuman, or resort to apophasis, or develop coded language. The solution often proposed is to consider purely verbal instigators of violence to be innocent of any crime, and consider the individuals who physically enact the violence as bearing all responsibility. Unfortunately, having personally witnessed mobs getting worked up and seeing firsthand the collapse of individual thought, I fear this approach is based on an over-generous analysis of the rationality (and individuation) of the human brain. I don't have any solution to propose.