User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 71

  1. #41
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    Tolerance you say?

    It's to stop people from being so drunk all the time!
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

  2. #42
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    135 so/sp
    Posts
    8,697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whatever View Post
    this is why some of us

    <--

    like to advocate opening a lot more family planning clinics with free birth control and sex ed classes worldwide... It's a lot cheaper than building more nukes AND is better on the planet

    For that is probably too late. Since the number of people is already far too large. On the other hand only one county on the world has one child policy as far as I know a yet that one seems to be the most polluted one. What is technically irrelevant since this is a global problem.

    Basicly severly limiting economic growth would be far more effective when it comes to this. However I think that we both know how much that scenario is likely.

  3. #43
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    20,124

    Default

    well, anything that slows population growth is better than nothing at all... and what's there to do otherwise? hope for another natural disaster of sorts?

    genocide isn't an option, it places the decision in the hands of those who hold power, and I don't trust anyone who rises to a position to make such decisions, not to mention that it's discriminatory and appalling and you can't hate people who are different than you because it's not like people choose the country of thier birth or their ethnicity!

    also, despite the fact that sustainability is considered the most viable option, it's highly unlikely that any developed country will change it's mind about how it maintains itself, and then there's the question of hypocrisy when the west tells the developing countries to quit developing the same way that we developed because during the industrial age and such the west was horribly dirty and polluted

    really the best solution to make things tolerable is education on the issue, education on sustainable living, education on birth control and family planning and assistance with developing an infrastructure that will allow everybody to be able to change enough to make SOME impact

    I refuse to give up hope
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  4. #44
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    AS,

    Sounds like the theme of the thread has shifted a touch-like intolerance fuels disagreement which serves to equalize populations and thus reduce strain on resources and enviornmental damage? Okay, I guess I buy this. But So do disease, natural disasters and so on. But honestly-do any of this significantly impact the population enough to actually prevent overpopulation and subsequent overutilization and destruction? I dont have the numbers in front of me, but my gut argues likely not. (of course totally discounting all of the arguments revolving around is it okay to allow human suffering.)

    Now-back to the tolerance argument. So you assume that by allowing one group to eliminate another, the remaining group will maximize resources and live in peace?

    I think intolerance is grounded in our innate biology for very specific reasons. In any area there will be limited resources. Only a specific population/area can be tolerated before those resources will be over utilized. Most animals kind of innately observe these rules and distribute populations accordingly. This distribution is done by different herds/packs of animals being somewhat averse to one another, starvation, and all types of inter-relations with predators and such. But to focus on the groups, They may meet for limited amounts of time, then break apart again. I'd guess the behavioral mechanisms might differ from herbivore to omnivore to carnivore and across species but displays of aggression seem common.

    Funny-our closest two genetic relatives:

    Chimps wage war on adjacent chimp clans and will kill each other.
    Bonobos actually will engage in orgies when they encounter other clans and then depart peacefully.

    (It looks like we follow the chimp model a little more closely.)

    So in humans-even if group one eliminates group 2-eventually group 1 will reach a population size which forces it to splinter as it is overutilizing resources. Thus aggression will reoccur, more will be killed, until the population reaches a stable point or the groups can disperse into two groups.

    It doesnt seem to matter where you go in the world you will see intolerance-race, sex, skin color, religion, country of origin, clothes, MBTI type, football team, hometown, the olympics. Humans WILL ALWAYS find a reason to dislike/compete against the "other" as the other is a member of a group which potentially competes against our group. We are kinda hard wired that way.

    So tolerance is sort of an intellectual acknowledgment that we should try and ignore our base biological instincts. Those instincts really dont fit well in the world we live in anymore. Even if something is very foreign to our understanding, tolerance suggests we add a moment of hesitation-a reconsideration-before making our judgment. We allow ourselves to ignore that innate "that's weird" response.

    (That's Te above-Fi says we should just love people for being the unique individuals they are and treasure them for their imperfections, differences, and being authentic to the things that define them. Love.)

  5. #45
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    which is that who I am to make judgments and force people what to do? What is legitimite democratic additude. However the freedom don't seem to have a positive effect in this case.

    So what should we ? Ignore the problem or becoming undemocratic?
    Since this is the dilema of our time as it looks for now.
    Its not a problem of being democratic or undemocratic, like you indicated growth and industrialisation in China is having a massive impact, its not a democracy.

    There are different sorts of global redistribution taking place, supranational bodies are restructuring the entire planet as a single farm, shopping mall and factory floor and this process is only being forestalled by nations, like the US and China fighting for competitive advantage.

    So I wouldnt worry really, the nations which are stupid enough to let ideological divisions escalate into open conflict and war will be at loss and their populations will pay the price, which might have some ecological easing effect who knows.

  6. #46
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    135 so/sp
    Posts
    8,697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YourLocalJesus View Post
    Good point, Antisocial one.

    I never put it into words; or rather I did not focus on tolerance.
    I am and will always be in vehement opposition to democracy, because it does not work.
    Furthermore, it is not only that tolerance/democracy does not work. It does, like you say, not lead anywhere but a status quo.
    I believe human progress to be an ideal worth pursuing, which means that I am in opposition to stagnation; a state we have been in for quite some time now.
    We don't need infighting and chaos; i.e democracy, capitalism, religions conflicting with the goal... Etc.


    The main balancing factor and argument against intolerance is indeed that "intolerance" makes you make a decision which will sometimes be unpleasant in the short-term.
    It does seem like a common denominator for a lot of people, that they refuse to do violence or act decisively when it is clearly needed.
    I have always found it odd that some people just won't punch a guy in the face if he deserves it, and if said person can get away with it.

    The question is where to draw the line? One cannot be completely without tolerance, that would lead to complete anarchy; which is entirely what at least I want to prevent at all costs.
    Well, at least lasting anarchy.
    Complete, short-term anarchy usually breeds dictatorship/kingdom, which I like.

    Why ?

  7. #47
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    There's really just two main things, honestly.

    Firstly, there's always the possibility yeu are wrong; to have intolerance towards another is to assume that yeu are right and they are wrong. It may be the reverse is true. Killing them off doesn't help anyone since none of us knows the truth until it's too late anyway, may as well leave yeur options open.

    The second problem is that intolerance leads to the lack of value of basic things such as life. In yeur own example, yeu killed off a bunch of people simply so that yeu could have economic stability for a short time. It's hard to define 'evil', considering it's a vague, gaseous concept rather than anything set in stone, but I'm pretty sure that would be covered by it. As soon as yeu stop tolerating other's beliefs, and start acting to restrict their thought, their freedom, and their lives, yeu have become something that most civilizations view as a criminal.



    Is tolerance directly related to wisdom? Not really. Indirectly they have similarities, and those that're intolerant usually aren't all that wise, but there are exceptions here and there.

    In general though, being willing to just exist with each other without being at each other's throats all the time isn't exactly all that bad a way to live. The alternative usually is either anarchy, civil war, or witch hunts, none of which really show humanity's better side.

  8. #48
    A passer by yvonne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    INfP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    564

    Default

    be tolerant, but only to the point you can tolerate.
    Enneagram 5w4.

  9. #49
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    135 so/sp
    Posts
    8,697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsuni View Post
    There's really just two main things, honestly.

    Firstly, there's always the possibility yeu are wrong; to have intolerance towards another is to assume that yeu are right and they are wrong. It may be the reverse is true. Killing them off doesn't help anyone since none of us knows the truth until it's too late anyway, may as well leave yeur options open.

    The second problem is that intolerance leads to the lack of value of basic things such as life. In yeur own example, yeu killed off a bunch of people simply so that yeu could have economic stability for a short time. It's hard to define 'evil', considering it's a vague, gaseous concept rather than anything set in stone, but I'm pretty sure that would be covered by it. As soon as yeu stop tolerating other's beliefs, and start acting to restrict their thought, their freedom, and their lives, yeu have become something that most civilizations view as a criminal.



    Is tolerance directly related to wisdom? Not really. Indirectly they have similarities, and those that're intolerant usually aren't all that wise, but there are exceptions here and there.

    In general though, being willing to just exist with each other without being at each other's throats all the time isn't exactly all that bad a way to live. The alternative usually is either anarchy, civil war, or witch hunts, none of which really show humanity's better side.

    Well I agree with you but I am afraid that the world is not nice enough place for this to worrk. What is basicly the core of the problem.

    Here is a trivial example. Towards your logic it is it barbaric to wipe out Somalian pirates from this world. Seriously why should we tolerate them ?

  10. #50
    A passer by yvonne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    INfP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    564

    Default

    ^ that's such a strange logic

    there are other ways to deal with people you can't tolerate than wiping them out
    Enneagram 5w4.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 12-24-2011, 06:23 PM
  2. [E5] Can someone explain to me 5w4 and 5w6?
    By Illmatic in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-16-2011, 02:12 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-23-2011, 01:11 AM
  4. Could someone explain the functions (dominant, auxilary...) to me?
    By KarenParker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 05-19-2009, 08:32 AM
  5. [INTJ] Un-Emotional to the point of ignoring reactive instinct?
    By Misty_Mountain_Rose in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-09-2008, 09:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO