Wiki - The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually ceased or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.

  • PlatypusXray@feddit.de
    241·
    1 year ago

    This gets abused a lot by people who claim agency over what is intolerance and what isn’t. It would seem an easy and straightforward enough distinction but in reality there seems to be a lot of wiggle room.

    • neonspool@lemmy.world
      9·
      1 year ago

      absolutely it gets abused. any time anyone wants you to tolerate what they want you to(defend their own tolerance), they might suggest that you’re not being tolerant enough. (suggesting you intolerant)

      this means that both intolerance of reasonable rules, as well as intolerance to unreasonable rules can always be twisted as “intolerant of the tolerant ruling”.

      essentially, whatever an authority establishes as being right/good must be tolerated, whereas what they consider wrong/bad will not be tolerated.

      of course most reasonable people know that what people think is good/bad/right/wrong varies massively, and how tricky and meaningless this fact can make the whole idea of “tolerating the intolerant”. it certainly doesn’t help in convincing the intolerant to be tolerant, so i think it’s not worth talking about.