The Intolerance of Tolerance- No Longer a Virtue ….Just A Logical Implausibility
“Tolerance” ….I am sick of that word being misused and I am not going to tolerate it anymore!
OK… granted we live in a society that has thrown a cog and broken it’s moral compass…leading us down the path of relativism…moral and otherwise. BUT I AM NOT OBLIGATED TO LIKE IT. I remember reading the marker on Einstein’s memorial which said:
“As long as I have any choice in the matter, I shall live only in a country where civil liberty, tolerance, and equality of all citizens before the law prevail.”
Sound virtuous? It was and still is … Unfortunately, one of America’s noblest virtues has been so distorted it’s become a vice. Supposedly, the “tolerant” person is completely impartial and others around him are therefore permitted to freely and openly make any choice they want without anyone imposing their views or judgments on him (or her ) But wait a minute… this ideology fails on the spot when it is not reciprocated right? If I tolerate what someone else does and their actions interfere with my own actions we have a ‘toleration dilemma” of sorts don’t we? Do we then turn the horn or do we not? Something has to give at this point …and how do we determine what and who wins when there is a ‘toleration standoff’ … ”rock …paper… scissors?” Without delving in the theories of personal choice let’s use the KISS method (keep it simple stupid) here are the initial permutations of our possible reactions where R = Respect and DR = Disrespect;
R DR – DR
DR R – DR
Right? Or wrong? ….Well wrong of course … if only life were that simple. I read an interesting paper that used the additional variable (v1) of picking and choosing our battles. I will get back to that thought in a second, as you will see we don’t even have to reach that far at all.
Webster tells us the word tolerance in this context means:
“To allow or to permit, to recognize and respect others’ beliefs, practices (behavior), and ideas without sharing them, to bear or put up with someone or something not necessarily liked”
Broken down there are at least 4 elements to tolerance: (1) to permit or allow, (2) a belief, practice, or idea (3) not shared, (4) put up with anyway in a respectful way. We don’t need to dig too deep to uncover the logical implausibility of it all. We can’t “tolerate” someone until and unless we disagree with him…right? We don’t “tolerate” people who share our views…we have them over for chicken dinner. They’re on our side. There’s nothing to put up with. Tolerance is reserved ONLY for those we think are wrong.
This essential element of tolerance…DISAGREEMENT! has been completely lost in the modern distortion of the concept. Judged by today’s standards if you think someone is wrong, you’re called intolerant.
Tolerance of other people assumes that everyone’s views have equal value or merit and that my views are no better or more correct than anyone else’s and their views are no more correct or meritorious than mine? I can’t decide if that idea is more irrational or more ridiculous. Taking the position that some views are immoral or wrong doesn’t’ violate any of the standards of tolerance. The definition of tolerance propounded on us all from the ‘if it feels good do it left” is that when we call out and question someone else’s belief, practice, behavior, or idea then we are automatically being intolerant of the person… (see the difference?) what a load of tripe! In our morally relativistic world it is not possible to tolerate the person and not the behavior …why not? Because under that theory there can exist no apology or rationalization for wrong or morally repugnant behaviors…which is unacceptable to the left…I mean come on isn’t that why we are being force fed this new definition of tolerance to begin with…to rationalize and excuse wrong thinking?
Sheeple, what we are being sold as tolerance today isn’t tolerance at all ….it’s an invitation to share in the mind numbing freedom and joy of the left’s moral and intellectual cowardice.
Those who hide behind the myth of today’s “new and improved snake oil” being labeled as ‘tolerance’, will not allow contrary opinions to be vetted or even considered. To do so would necessarily require opening up a whole Pandora’s box of dispositive moral and intellectual rebuttals. It is much easier to hurl invectives like “hater” and “bigot”, or my favorite…”is that all you can do is repeat what Glenn Beck/Rush Limptard/Faux News/Sarah Palin/Bill O’Reilly/Michael Savage/Lars Larson/Sean Hannity (and our own IQ’s over 60) tells you to say” …. Ahhhhh NOPE!
Today ….“tolerance” has become the new “intolerance’ ,….how do you like it?