> The paradox of tolerance, as it is commonly argued, has to be one of the worst philosophical arguments actually taken seriously. My understanding of the “par

> The paradox of tolerance, as it is commonly argued, has to be one of the worst philosophical arguments actually taken seriously. My understanding of the “paradox” was consistent with the long-form argument that you provided, and it always made perfect sense to me. In the face of a violent group who don’t respect the arguments and traditions of tolerant society, societies must defend themselves with means other than rational argument, or perish. You seem to be arguing not against Popper but rather against some nebulous “as it is commonly argued” (maybe on Reddit?) and you haven’t done a very good job of defining the position you’re critiquing.