Moral dilemma regarding Intolerance...?

Question

if we (society) should decide that intolerance is unacceptable and will not be tolerated, wouldn't that make us... intolerant?

Mr Skullhead: Yes that would appear to be the wise choice...however, in order to implement this we would have to say that: sometimes intolerance is o.k. as long as the intolerance is directed at those whom we percieve to be intolerant

and isn't that just stooping to their level?

Answer 1

How about we be tolerant to the tolerant, and be intolerant to the intolerant.

Answer 2

If you want to justify this then you have to put the personal stuff aside and focus on the professional reasons to have him removed from the company. His behaviour seems unconstructive and immature and from what you've described it's obvious he is a hinderance to your companies goals. For these reasons alone, the management should already have assessed whether he is worth keeping. There's a good chance that they already have noticed all this and this e-mail you're holding could be the straw that breaks the camels back (so to speak). If you do choose to share the email with the management, be careful how you go about doing so. If it looks like your trying to get him fired for personal reasons then you will likely end up in even more trouble than he will. In summary, it's probably best to pass the email onto management, but do so in a way which won't cause you any backlash.

Answer 3

If you were intolerant of everything you would soon be dead. You wouldn't tolerate food, friends, money, love. you would be in limbo, unable to move due to a hatred of the universe. So one must tolerate things. The one thing we can mostly agree on is that we must tolerate life. We must then divide parts of life we will and will not tolerate.

By the same token, if we tolerated everything we would have no standards murder rape bigotry and theft would all be fine. Chaos would reign. We must by general reason then admit we must be intolerant. We then have to divide up what parts of life we will be intolerant towards.

Answer 4

No dilemna! Tolerance is alway in order when it involves differences that do not infringe on my(or societies) rights and freedoms. Intolerance is appropriate when it does, and only to the extent that it does.
Your example of tolerating intolerance or vice versa, would be like saying I collect uncollectable stamps. It just doesn't compute.

Answer 5

Ive often pondered the exact same notion. I tend to see things for what they are. Humans ARE intolerant. Some more then others, but we ALL have the " Propenstity " to be both. Good/bad, tolerant/intolerant, saints/sinners, smart/stupid.. and so on. We just are basically organisms which need to fullfil primal urges (hunger, sex, etc.) . We are NOT better then our basic needs. We simply are who we are.

Answer 6

Well that would depend, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the—if he—if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement".

Of course there is the issue of political correctness
Read "1984" and "Animal Farm".
Where the very MEANING of words means only what the Ruling Elite SAY they mean. (thanks to vincent who answered my Q on democrats/communists)

Intolerance my friend is defined by the ruling elite, and its definition in your mind only applies to the communists, not to the subjects of their rule.

Answer 7

Mr. Skullhead's on target.

Same thing should apply to trade, immigration policies, the Geneva convention,and rules of engagement.

Reciprocity treats others as they treat you.

Answer 8

No - Decisive.

Intolerance is when ones patience has run out and affirmative action needs to take place.

We have to reach that point before anything will happen so here a decision has to be made prior to that state.

Answer 9

Indeed! Life is nothing if not _____. Gee that's another thing life is, I can't remember the doggone word!

Answer 10

silly question....by teaching tolerance, are we not teaching people to hate, but to keep their hate quiet in public?....should we not be teaching acceptance?....but, to answer your question.....of course, some things do not have to be tolerated....i think this campaign is directed to tolerate things with generality....tolerate people in general....it would be ridiculous to think that we could tolerate everything!