Can someone explain the point of tolerance to me ?

[miss fortune]

Ok, but why don't you get rid of them ? (just asking)

because they change the oil in my car and sometimes produce catchy old style country tunes... and some of them are also family members

i.e. they're useful too

and that's seriously all you got from my post?

 

[Virtual ghost]

Yeah. The Roman Empire (I have to be biased, I'm sorry ) basically let its provinces do what the hell they wanted, provided they paid taxes to fund eating & orgies in Rome. That's the spirit.

No it is not. That is just ENTJ logic at work.

Tolerance's usefulness is relative to the situation. There is no "always" in most things. You could find situations wherein the action of tolerance has improved the situation. There is a saying, "There's always a time for everything." The tolerance you define here, however, is general and therefore will be more likely to adapt things which you wouldn't call "tolerance" itself. It's just part of the process.

The point of tolerance is many.

No, it probably isn't the always the best solution, but what is? How do we define what's the best and how can we make sure it is the best?

There are different type of initiations and tolerance could be one those methods. Think about the African-American problem and the methods Martin Luther King Jr. used.

Well I never said that antitolerance is the ultimate answer but sometimes I think it is. As for best solution ..... you study the problem in detail find what should give best results on the long run and apply the solution. (Of course if we accept the standard logic as a judging standard)
In most cases it is simple as that.

 

[Virtual ghost]

and that's seriously all you got from my post?

Nope. But I wasn't sure that you want to go deeper.

Sure looking at the future seems like a fine and nice approach theoretically, but it's the present that we live in, the present that has to take place so that a future will occur... we live in a series of "the present"s, we never live in the future :rolli:

True. However future is basicly almost the only thing that matters. (at least towards my logic)

I agree with gromit on the individual basis- and society is made up of individuals, not of concrete "groups"... if we approach that which is different with an open mind and some warmth we often can learn things and grow, not just as individuals, but as a society in general as well.

Well this perhaps works for the US. But in many countries this is not the case for the most part. In my country large number of people are crying for more collectivistic logic that exist before.

There are racists in this country who would be happy to get rid of people from other races and make the US a white Christian's haven- but what would we miss out on if we took that intolerant approach? We'd lose a large portion of the workforce, we would lose a good number of the country's intellectuals, artists, musicians, athletes and the basic every day people who keep things running smoothly... we'd lose a good portion of the heart and soul of the country if we cut out those who were different. Sure, it might make things run more smoothly to some, from a theoretical viewpoint... we wouldn't have racial violence, for instance, or debates on affirmative action, but what sort of nut job would trade that for a society that didn't work?

When a country is at war against someone (and they tend to wage war against what the view as "different and undesirable") all of the country's resources, both financial and intellectual, tend to get tied up in that effort instead of the effort of making things better for those of us who actually live in the country- distractions of hating those who are "different" are just a good tool to make us forget that our country doesn't seem to care about our day to day lives Hating what is different is always a great way to distract people from what's going on at home... Intolerance has a high cost, both financially and societally

Isn't this simplistic view of things ? Basicly the only way "they" can provide all the resouces needed to create society as you know it is by getting them outside of the country. However it looks to me that most people in the US simply can't figure this one out or accept is as the truth. (this can be debated in more detail)

And there's always the point that to someone else YOU'RE the outsider who is different- and I'd rather live a life where I can pour my resources into making life more pleasant, advancing knowlege and loving my neighbors instead of going all Stone Age and fighting with everyone who's different from me! The plowshare approach- learning how to grow better food, build better houses, learn more things that can benefit me and everyone else seems much wiser than the sword approach of just fighting and pouring your energy into that- how does that make life worth living?

Well a number of "great man" in history had something that can be considered a succesful life simply because they made someones life a living hell.

What leads to a question : do we really need all those great men ?
Since I am basicly thinking the same way you are. It is just that I am not that much idealistc as far as I can see.

Tolerance is really the more evolved approach to humanity- appreciate that which is unlike you so that you can learn even more, and knowlege really IS a form of power!

True. But what I am asking here is is this really achivable ?

 

[Not_Me]

It is usually more cost effective for both sides to strive for tolerance rather than to engage in open conflict.

 

[lastrailway]

Tolerance in the society on the whole is ensuring that you will be less likely to be discriminated or not accepted if you happen to belong in any kind of minority, which is where lies its value. On a personal level I've find it to be, more often than not, unnecessary, so on an individual level I believe tolerance should be practised or not on a case-to-case basis, while on a group level tolerance should be necessary to ensure survival and co-existence of distinct groups.

The flip side of this is that, if one happens to belong in any minority group and has found the mainstream group to be intolerant towards theirs, then I'm not convinced whether it's for the discriminated group's best interests to go tolerant or to go intolerant too. IOW, tolerance could be useful if it were universal, otherwise it might not produce good results.

 

[miss fortune]

@ Antisocial One- I think living in the future at the expense of the present might very well prevent a future from happening... it's ALWAYS the present everywhere and we're stuck living in it, so why not try and make the present more tolerable

That might sound like a mindless sheep attitude to you, but I'm looking out for myself here and I don't particularly care to live in a society where I might be selected as undesirable someday and culled- plus, I LIKE learning from people who are different from me and have never seen them to be "dangerous" or in need of tolerance- people are people and to see them otherwise is absolutley moronic. I know people of my own cultural background who do things more rediculous than my Mexican neighbors would ever dream of doing and I see that fearing that which is different is pretty reactionary.

Is accepting different ideas fine but not accepting different people? Otherwise we might as well pitch progress out the window as well, because new ideas are what makes society move- it's what should provide me with my very own personal flying saucer at some point in the future as well, hopefully Ideas and people are both similar in that both can broaden and deepen our lives, both intellectual and physical and to reject something just because it's different is cutting off our potential for development

I really don't think you're seeing a broader view of society at all... I'm not being ignorant of the facts, like you seem to think I am- I'm a minority in my own part of town and am not bothered by that in the least- I personally think that judging someone based on color or culture is incredibly stupid and shallow I've never seen a point to doing that- I don't see those as different to be a threat to me- we're all people and it's not like they're barbarian invaders out to rape and pillage :rolli:

And to be honest, does anyone really have the right to say who does and doesn't belong somewhere? Everyone's been an immigrant at some point... longer ago in some regions of the world than in others, but unless you're from and live in the Great Rift Valley, your ancestors moved

You seem to have a superior attitude towards people from "the new world" in your tone there in a way... I don't approve of my country's foreign policy for the good part, but I can't say that I appreciate you judging us as a people based on the decision of some idiots in Washington

If you look at the world's history it's generally the locations where people from different places rubbed shoulders, cities of trade, where the advances took place- where people could read and learn from the ideas of others and synthesize them into something new and better- it's not the socially isolated regions with no outside influence- otherwise there would be tribes in Borneo with nuclear capabilites or something of the sort. Even your "great men" stole ideas from others and synthesized them into their own- and we can't say that humanity wouldn't be better off without some of them because we didn't get the experience to learn what it would be like otherwise did we?

And to answer your question, I think that exposure to different cultures and different ideas will eventually change things to make that more possible... the ability to work together with knowlege from everywhere to make things work even better- I haven't yet seen a modern breakthrough in anything that didn't take ideas or people from various sources. Processes, especially social ones, are slow, but things DO tend to work out in the end

 

[gromit]

Otherwise we might as well pitch progress out the window as well, because new ideas are what makes society move- it's what should provide me with my very own personal flying saucer at some point in the future as well, hopefully Ideas and people are both similar in that both can broaden and deepen our lives, both intellectual and physical and to reject something just because it's different is cutting off our potential for development

 

[Lark]

Basically, to the original poster, all your reasoning is "why should I tolerate?" but in reality you should be thinking "why should I be tolerated?", whatever you want for your neighbour you must want for yourself, if you want to exist in peace and prosperity then you have to first be tolerated.

I dont know what you mean by failing or will fail in the future, tolerance in the UK for instance has been so successful that the things it used to take conscious work and legislation to ensure tolerance off, such as Roman Catholicism or schism among Christian churches, are tolerated without any effort any longer, its not an issue anymore.

The fact that what people are unwilling to tolerate changes makes me think that it can be and is successful. Plus you define your terms for tolerance so incredibly vaguely it could be just about anything, I mean are you proposing race war, religious war, war on sexual behaviour issues, football teams, gang affiliations, what? The legitimacy of any of those criteria is a seperate topic. However I reckon it sounds like you're up for the war/fight and the criteria is an afterthought, not such a great idea.

 

[Virtual ghost]

@ Antisocial One- I think living in the future at the expense of the present might very well prevent a future from happening... it's ALWAYS the present everywhere and we're stuck living in it, so why not try and make the present more tolerable

That might sound like a mindless sheep attitude to you, but I'm looking out for myself here and I don't particularly care to live in a society where I might be selected as undesirable someday and culled- plus, I LIKE learning from people who are different from me and have never seen them to be "dangerous" or in need of tolerance- people are people and to see them otherwise is absolutley moronic. I know people of my own cultural background who do things more rediculous than my Mexican neighbors would ever dream of doing and I see that fearing that which is different is pretty reactionary.

Is accepting different ideas fine but not accepting different people? Otherwise we might as well pitch progress out the window as well, because new ideas are what makes society move- it's what should provide me with my very own personal flying saucer at some point in the future as well, hopefully Ideas and people are both similar in that both can broaden and deepen our lives, both intellectual and physical and to reject something just because it's different is cutting off our potential for development

I really don't think you're seeing a broader view of society at all... I'm not being ignorant of the facts, like you seem to think I am- I'm a minority in my own part of town and am not bothered by that in the least- I personally think that judging someone based on color or culture is incredibly stupid and shallow I've never seen a point to doing that- I don't see those as different to be a threat to me- we're all people and it's not like they're barbarian invaders out to rape and pillage :rolli:

And to be honest, does anyone really have the right to say who does and doesn't belong somewhere? Everyone's been an immigrant at some point... longer ago in some regions of the world than in others, but unless you're from and live in the Great Rift Valley, your ancestors moved

You seem to have a superior attitude towards people from "the new world" in your tone there in a way... I don't approve of my country's foreign policy for the good part, but I can't say that I appreciate you judging us as a people based on the decision of some idiots in Washington

If you look at the world's history it's generally the locations where people from different places rubbed shoulders, cities of trade, where the advances took place- where people could read and learn from the ideas of others and synthesize them into something new and better- it's not the socially isolated regions with no outside influence- otherwise there would be tribes in Borneo with nuclear capabilites or something of the sort. Even your "great men" stole ideas from others and synthesized them into their own- and we can't say that humanity wouldn't be better off without some of them because we didn't get the experience to learn what it would be like otherwise did we?

And to answer your question, I think that exposure to different cultures and different ideas will eventually change things to make that more possible... the ability to work together with knowlege from everywhere to make things work even better- I haven't yet seen a modern breakthrough in anything that didn't take ideas or people from various sources. Processes, especially social ones, are slow, but things DO tend to work out in the end

You got me wrong I am not judging you or your county. I am simply digging and going through this entire concept of tolerance since my environemnt did not rised me in a way to be tolerant. However it failed in this endevour for the most part. (believe it or not)


Also I haven't said anything about races and cultural background. Basicly the only thing that I was asking you is what you will "do" with people that are not so open as you are ? Since it is unlikely that the both sides will reach their goal if one does not change their mind. What could be unlikely.


However on the other hand what you discribed was how ideas used to be created before. Today this is mostly something that is far away from the eyes of the public. Which is because to create anything really new you need decades od specialized education or your work will simplay be a business secret. I know that this unromantic but I am afraid this is how thing are going at the moment. What does not mean that I am not annoyed because of that.

@ Antisocial One- I think living in the future at the expense of the present might very well prevent a future from happening... it's ALWAYS the present everywhere and we're stuck living in it, so why not try and make the present more tolerable

Because the moment you notice the preset it will be gone. The only thing you can effect is the future. Past and persent are out of your control.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Basically, to the original poster, all your reasoning is "why should I tolerate?" but in reality you should be thinking "why should I be tolerated?", whatever you want for your neighbour you must want for yourself, if you want to exist in peace and prosperity then you have to first be tolerated.

I dont know what you mean by failing or will fail in the future, tolerance in the UK for instance has been so successful that the things it used to take conscious work and legislation to ensure tolerance off, such as Roman Catholicism or schism among Christian churches, are tolerated without any effort any longer, its not an issue anymore.

The fact that what people are unwilling to tolerate changes makes me think that it can be and is successful. Plus you define your terms for tolerance so incredibly vaguely it could be just about anything, I mean are you proposing race war, religious war, war on sexual behaviour issues, football teams, gang affiliations, what? The legitimacy of any of those criteria is a seperate topic. However I reckon it sounds like you're up for the war/fight and the criteria is an afterthought, not such a great idea.

I know that is very vague argument since I am delibaretly making very wide argument.


Have you ever heard the phrase "Don't kill the massager." ?

 

[miss fortune]

I am patient and kind with those who are less tolerant, as the best way to teach is through example... I've met plenty of close minded people who became more open when they were exposed to what was different in a non-threatening manner... even my grandfather softened up when he made a few friends of different races. Patience and kindess are the greatest weapons against intolerance... sometimes the patience means waiting until they die, of course

I'm from a small, insular and intolerant community, though it somehow never sunk in... I went to the same university as several of my close minded classmates and had to smirk when I noticed that they were actually becoming more tolerant of that which is different through exposure to nice people who were different... most of those people have moved home, several with spouses of very different backgrounds and their children will be more open minded than the generation before... it's a slow process, but it happens

and in thinking about the present- there's actions that you could do right now that could make a difference- too many people put off to tommorrow what they could do today... that attitude irks me

 

[Virtual ghost]

I know that is very vague argument since I am delibaretly making very wide argument.


Have you ever heard the phrase "Don't kill the massager." ?

Ok instead of waiting for Lark to say "Yes" I will simply point at what it is actually bothering me. However I think that it is not simple as it looks.


Link



I am I the only one here who thinks this is a very serious problem ?

 

[Valiant]

Ok instead of waiting for Lark to say "Yes" I will simply point at what it is actually bothering me. However I think that it is not simple as it looks.


Link



I am I the only one here who thinks this is a very serious problem ?

Nope, over-population is a big problem which must be solved.
Either through relatively peaceful methods, i.e what China is trying to do.
Or, people needs to start dying. I for one thinks this is a sign that things can't be like they are now.
It's simply not stable.

 

[miss fortune]

well, that's why people should be more tolerant of homosexuals... they generally DON'T reproduce

I just think it's crazy for anyone to feel superior enough to decide who to weed out and who is of value- that's a really shitty attitude to have towards anything

 

[Virtual ghost]

Nope, over-population is a big problem which must be solved.
Either through relatively peaceful methods, i.e what China is trying to do.
Or, people needs to start dying. I for one thinks this is a sign that things can't be like they are now.
It's simply not stable.

Well this threand is what caused me alot of my ability to empathise. I am studing the Earth as a system professionally and unproffesionally for over 20 years now and I can't find a way how have global stability even in most general lines with this trend.

I deliberatly pushed "Why do you believe in peace and tolerance" before I said what is really on my mind. Which is because I think that people are vastly underestimate this trend and I wanted to see the contrast between me and others.

I mean this trend undermines huge amount of stuff from global stability and productivity to philosophy and ethics.

 

[Valiant]

I see the point, and I have been thinking along similar lines for some time.
I think it is a major issue that people cannot see the whole picture, link the patterns, twist around the idea inside the head from a bunch of angles and simply acknowledge something they don't like.
Sort of like Creationists, you know?

Well. It does undermine the views on most things quite throughly.

 

[Virtual ghost]

well, that's why people should be more tolerant of homosexuals... they generally DON'T reproduce

I just think it's crazy for anyone to feel superior enough to decide who to weed out and who is of value- that's a really shitty attitude to have towards anything

I agree. But that just seems to be the cherry on the cake in this case.


When you watch it like this it does not look so bad. But I advise people too do a little test. Before you go to sleep write down a number that is on your screen and go to sleep. So when you wake up take another look at what you have on your screen. Also you can do this with a week or a month of pausing.

 

[Lark]

I was suspiscious something like this was behind it, the whole Earth Firster sympathy for war, famine, disease and population control, its all misplaced, there could be thousands of individuals born to low, low impact, self-sufficient communities and it wouldnt matter, what's the problem is the unsustainability of western consumerism and its spread as the ideal to the rest of the world.

For every full grown obesce western consumer there could be entire families, even villages, living well in the third world for the same resources and money.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I was suspiscious something like this was behind it, the whole Earth Firster sympathy for war, famine, disease and population control, its all misplaced, there could be thousands of individuals born to low, low impact, self-sufficient communities and it wouldnt matter, what's the problem is the unsustainability of western consumerism and its spread as the ideal to the rest of the world.

For every full grown obesce western consumer there could be entire families, even villages, living well in the third world for the same resources and money.

True. (as far as I know)


However I am not bothered that much that I will have to deal with the problem. I am more concered with the fact that the problem will deal with us.
In other words the problem will solve itself out in most likey scenario.



Here is one sattelite picture of China.

So if we know that this is the consequence of the ideal know as the economic growth of 10% then it is complety reasonable to ask "Is society capable of making their own choices" ? Or maybe they simply lack the infornation and proper education ?


Plus you have a problem that Whatever mentioned 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.

 

[miss fortune]

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