Is this logically sound, or am I way off base here?
Tolerance? Tolerance is unacceptable . . . as an ethic . . .
To the editor of Teaching Tolerance
Dear Editor,
I believe you (meaning this organization) have chosen the wrong word to fly your flag on. In short, I believe that tolerance is unacceptable. Rest assured that this is not the ranting of the religious right, or the wailing of a white supremacist. This is a protest to the use of tolerance as an ethic.
Tolerance is an acceptable variation from a standard, however looked at philosophically,"That which is not right is wrong." If we set our standard by the right, how can tolerance be anything but wrong.
Over and over again in the media, and from groups such as Teaching Tolerance, we hear tolerance, the acceptance of wrong, praised and expounded as an admirable ethic. anyone who lets their logos fraternize with their ethos will tell you that this is ridiculous. To Teach Tolerance is to teach that there is an acceptable wrong, and that it should not only be embraced, but that embracing it is a goal unto itself.
Suppose that we did embrace toleration as an ethic. To do this would be to accept the belief that embracing acceptable deviation from a standard,(tolerance), is in and of itself a moral standard (ethic).
This means that tolerance as ethic makes accepting deviation from a standard a standard, which is as we all know, an oxymoron.
Q.E.D. Proof by contradiction.
This was not written to recruit idealists, but rather to encourage realists to embrace logically sound principles.While the logical reader has been forced to abandon tolerance as an ethic, it is important for them to note that tolerance is both necessary and proper in many situations, however it is no substitute for the right.
If you want to combat issues of racism, gay hate, classism, or sexism, why not use a real ethic, respect.
"And now you know . . . the rest of the story" PH
BTW "the rest of the story" was an objective portion of PH’s program.
6 Responses
Navigueser
28 May 2010
Bradley V
28 May 2010
You make a good point. Tolerance is being redefined as accepting, respecting and conforming to one person’s point of view. But in actuality, tolerance is only "fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from ones own." Some people seem to seem to say that you have to accept and conform to their beliefs, but they take a double standard and do not accept and conform to your beliefs. You seem to be hitting on this point from a technical point of view. GOOD CALL
Julianna O
28 May 2010
Party on Garth
This is WAY too verbose to make any kind of impact. I suggest you type this out, print it and then burn it in your fireplace.
Y.Pestis
28 May 2010
"And now you know . . . the rest of the story" PH
No,someone who ends his post with a quote from Paul Harvey,
could never be a member of the religious right, or a wailing white supremacist.
(Just because Harvey is to the far right of Rush Limbough)
Ever read Mein Kampf?
Parts of it sound pretty good,even progressive.
Of course we know "the rest of the story" on that also.
its Neews!!!
Chaitali N
28 May 2010
quite logical
Paul D
28 May 2010
A time and place, and circumstance for everything..Like thou shalt not Kill…if someone is tryig to hurt my children, I would be abliged to hurt or kill….same for tolerance..we must tolerate different behaviors. mores’ till the point they hurt us or others…just plain old common sense…a rare commodity here
Well stated and proved.