• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Tolerance or Truth?

Foreigner said:
I don't think true tolerance is rational. At the highest level it's rooted in compassion, which is unconditional. Compassion sees through circumstance and into the common humanity.

Secularism enforces tolerance through rationality, but it's ultimately compassion that nourishes the final benevolent outcome.

Since compassion and truth come from the same source, those able to exercise the most genuine compassion are likely to understand truth better than anyone else. I don't really believe pure rationalists can fully grasp truth as it pertains to human existence, because you can rationalize most actions, including the most heinous. Tyranny and oppression rationalize themselves all the time, but it's compassion which proves them wrong.
Click to expand...

Ah, but tolerance and compassion are two different things.

Compassion:
sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it

Tolerance:
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.


One sparks an emotion, the other dulls it.
 
just because someone holds a belief doesn't really mean anything; two people of the same religion for instance might be entirely living opposite lifestyles, and people may even be confused enough for them to act contrary to their beliefs. i mean imagine that? so people should perhaps be judged by their works, not based in imaginings. recently there was that news story about the black santa and then black people getting mad, over white santa - there is no fucking santa people!
 
Shrooms00087 said:
Ah, but tolerance and compassion are two different things.

Compassion:
sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it

Tolerance:
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.


One sparks an emotion, the other dulls it.
Click to expand...

All you did was quote the textbook oxford definition of compassion. I'm talking about the spiritual version, where compassion is your practice, not a knee-jerk reaction. Compassion at its highest level is not merely an emotion but a state of being.

Compassion fosters your second definition, and it's not merely sympathy.
 
Foreigner said:
All you did was quote the textbook oxford definition of compassion. I'm talking about the spiritual version, where compassion is your practice, not a knee-jerk reaction. Compassion at its highest level is not merely an emotion but a state of being.

Compassion fosters your second definition, and it's not merely sympathy.
Click to expand...

Pot smokers tolerate the punishment, people tolerate pot smokers. Seems like a dulled situation.
 
I guess it also depends on what is meant by tolerate.. I mean.. when does tolerance become intolerance?

Does it end with respecting their opinion as another other than your own?
Think they're a fckin idiot but don't let them know your feelings?
Tell them you think they're a fckin idiot?
Spread your message to others against their beliefs? Sabotage their work? Criminalize their practices? Kill them?
 
rickolasnice said:
I guess it also depends on what is meant by tolerate.. I mean.. when does tolerance become intolerance?

Does it end with respecting their opinion as another other than your own?
Think they're a fckin idiot but don't let them know your feelings?
Tell them you think they're a fckin idiot?
Spread your message to others against their beliefs? Sabotage their work? Criminalize their practices? Kill them?
Click to expand...

Tolerance shouldn't become intolerance. Intolerance is just a person unable to change their views. Conversely intolerance can become tolerance. Racists still exist but they're forced to suffer and exercise tolerance through a just system.
 
I'm pretty sure intolerance isn't just a person who is unable to change their views..

My question is what is considered to be intolerance? And where does the line between respecting their opinion / actions no matter what to voicing your opinion / retaliating?

Going back to the OP:

We shouldn't tolerate bad ideas if they are used (or exist) to do harm to others, this includes charging people for naivety. We shouldn't tolerate homeopathy at all. It's disgusting. People that sell this stuff are looked up to as a person of authority (or at least a person that knows about medicine) to the ignorant believers and they abuse this position to make money. If that isn't immoral enough, they promote the use of it as medicine. Imagine a mother asking Mr Homeopathy (who has little to no knowledge in medicine) why her son has a fever and what to do about it being told:

http://www.homeopathyworld.com/ said:
Use your Homeopathy Guide in your kit to find a remedy that fits the whole symptom picture, including the fever
Click to expand...

That kid could die.

We shouldn't tolerate priests who preach to put all their trust in God for health related issues for the same reason (minus the money.. although i'm sure they get enough from other immoral means).. There have been several cases in the past couple years where children have died after the parent refused the advice and treatment of doctors and relied on praying instead.

We shouldn't tolerate any culture or practised ideology that treat women as lesser people.. This allows men to treat their wives how they wish and there is nothing they can do about it. Women can't even divorce their husband without his permission.

Psychics and mediums should all be put to the test before being allowed to charge people for their "services".. But imo.. They shouldn't be tolerated as none of them would pass the test.. Again, it's exploiting people and charging them for their ignorance.

Religion having a say in political matters should not be tolerated. Creationism being taught in science lessons should not be tolerated.

We should have the right to stop "bad ideas". Because bad ideas lead to bad actions / outcomes. No matter how seemingly insignificant, they're still bad.

We should have the right to destroy "bad ideas" as bad ideas are, well, bad :p They are damaging in one way or another.
 
I pretty much gave you the definition:
unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own.

Did you mean another word?

Being a loud mouth is only partially related to being tolerant or not.
 
Depends on the meaning and context you give the word.. It could mean to allow without prohibiting or opposing..

Going on the definition you posted (although correct) - Everyone would be intolerant.
 
rickolasnice said:
Depends on the meaning and context you give the word.. It could mean to allow without prohibiting or opposing..

Going on the definition you posted (although correct) - Everyone would be intolerant.
Click to expand...


You think everyone is unable to accept views? Well that's just being intolerant.
 
Although you find it fun raping babies and that no harm is done, I disagree. You can argue your point if you feel it necessary...
 
Tolerance is assuming truth is not simply known and is composed of equal parts of all opinions; so you let another person's opinion cause you to doubt your own opinion.
As long as both parties are acting tolerant, there is something to gain. There is this great thing about being right and it is called evidence.
If someone resorts to personal insults then they are not being tolerant. If you refuse to let someone simply have an opinion which is wrong then you are not being tolerant.
I feel this is what is being debated, should we simply let ignorant pieces of shit go out into the world with their stupidity?
Well you know their opinion is not merely a harmless joke, whether you see the result of it or not, you know they are going to have repercussions. But these acts and opinions are from and will markedly show that they have no tolerance.
There is nothing to gain from tolerating the intolerant other than to prove to them that tolerance is best, and that is the only way to change their opinion. So what other choice do you have other than to tolerate?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top