this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
528 points (99.8% liked)

196

16450 readers
2058 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 year ago (17 children)

There actually is no paradox if you think of this way:

Be tolerant of ideas that harm nobody.

Be intolerant of ideas that harm others.

"I'm gay." <- Tolerable.

"I'm not gay, so I won't date men." <- Tolerable.

"I'm not gay, so I think we should kill all gay people." <- Intolerable.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The dilemma is how you define harming others and what implies being intolerant to an idea rather than a person holding that idea.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Harm is a pretty solid metric. Not some imaginary "think of the children" harm, but the "this disturbs/literally harms me" kind.

Yes, some people are precious little weirdos that won't want to see anything. The question then falls to society to determine if it was ultimately tolerable if they bring up grievance. Then the paradox comes in because the general vibes are always a moving target.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry but no, it's not in any way solid. Some think of what they see as sinful as harmful.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

No, sin is wholly different than harm.

load more comments (15 replies)