4 ms·

I feel like we are using this word, intolerant, without an agreed upon definition. We are trying to measure something but we have no metric for it. To answer y

I feel like we are using this word, intolerant, without an agreed upon definition. We are trying to measure something but we have no metric for it. To answer your question, we need a way to measure the level of intolerance, whatever this is. Should we measure the laws in effect? Should we measure the number of tolerable behaviours? Should we weigh these behaviours in our metric? How do we deal with behaviours that are nominally considered immoral but in practice are accepted? How do we deal with regional differences? I don’t know the answer to your question.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
Forget measuring. We don't even agree on which direction the axis runs. People on the left think "intolerance" is saying that gays shouldn't be able to marry, or that your biological sex is your gender. People on the right think that "intolerance" is saying that you shouldn't be able to own guns, or that you shouldn't be allowed to say the stuff that the left thinks is intolerant. That is, both sides want to define "intolerance" as being anti-parallel to their own political axis. But that's not right. Either both of those are intolerance, or neither. So we need a definition (worse, a definition that is agreed-upon, even if only loosely) that isn't tilted one way or the other politically. Between cognitive bias and bad faith, that's hard to get.