Unable to load image
House Racist Founder
@911roofer's profile picture @911roofer's hat
911roofer he/him Always a Wallflower, never a Wall  1yr ago (reddit.com) 892 thread views #125379

Ivermectin!

https://old.reddit.com/r/Wallstreetsilver/comments/z1frav/us_fda_now_says_that_their_campaign_to_stop

https://old.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/z20759/twitter_is_officially_gone_the_only_thing/

https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/yzvxvd/fda_says_telling_people_not_to_take_ivermectin/

https://old.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/yzivu7/doctor_lost_her_husband_to_q_tries_to_prevent_her/

https://old.reddit.com/r/DebateVaccines/comments/z02u01/fda_says_telling_people_not_to_take_ivermectin/

https://old.reddit.com/r/QAnonCasualties/comments/z0ixj4/parents_believe_ill_die_if_i_get_vaccinated_for/

https://old.reddit.com/r/QAnonCasualties/comments/z1ngf2/my_dad_is_hospitalized_from_ivermectin/

https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/yz3ei4/remember_when_the_nyt_definitively_stated_that/

66
New Old Top Bottom Controversial Random
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

View entire discussion

Literally the wikipedia page. The part redditors quote is in bold:

Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. β€”In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion

Where is the contradiction?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The contradiction is that redditors use (the first part of) this passage to justify why people with badthink must not be allowed to express their opinions and why all argument with them must be denounced pre-emptively. I.E. they're exhibiting the exact behaviour which Popper said is not justified and must not be tolerated.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yes, but when do you define the boundary for when you can counter someone with rational logic? And when are you no longer keeping them in check by public opinion? Conspiracy theorists are an example of people who are impenetrable to rational thought and would therefore meet the criteria set by his "rule" especially given the now widespread prevalence of these beliefs resulting in negative real-world harm, such as antivax conspiracy theorists resulting in the reemergence of numerous previously controlled infections (I'm not even talking about Covid-19). I don't see any contradiction, but you would be free to disagree as to when that line should be drawn.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The criterion isn't "am I successfully countering this idea with my arguments", the criterion is "are the people I disagree with engaging in rational argument". In other words, the only condition under which you're allowed to dispense with argument and resort to force is if your opponents have resorted to force first.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Then you simply say they are not engaging in rational argument. Conspiracy theorists do not engage in rational argument so I am free to dispense with argument if their rhetoric is sufficiently damaging. It reads quite clearly, what aren't you understanding?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

the only condition under which you're allowed to dispense with argument and resort to force is if your opponents have resorted to force first.

I'm not sure if you genuinely have bad reading comprehension or if you're trying to do a thing where you argue in a dumb way to show that you can frustrate anyone into giving up on argument as a means for resolving disputes. Although I will say that leftoids have already developed their loophole around Popper's criterion by reasoning that sufficiently distasteful ideas are in and of themselves violence and hence justify responding with violent force, so it's all pointless anyway other than to point out the illiterate pretensions of redditors.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Is this really the reading comprehension level of the average rightoid? There is nothing in that paragraph that says that literal force is required for there to be a response of force to intolerance.

We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law

You really have to be fricking dumb to not understand that preaching intolerance is not an act of physical force right?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This is immediately following a lengthy argument whereby Popper specifies the necessary level of intolerance to trigger suppression:

that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols

I.E. "intolerance" here should not be read in a vague sense but specifically means "people who won't tolerate hearing a contrary argument".

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments
Top Poster of the Day:
911roofer
Current Registered Users: 26,288
sidebar image

BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS SITE GUIDE DIRECTORY Emojis & Art | Info Megathreads HOLES PING GROUPS

CURRENT EVENTS:

Summer of Pride Banner Contest

2x15 Mbux prize for the best straggot buttblasting

Pride Singing Contest

30K Mbux prize for your gay performance

rDrama Pride Events

Win $100 gift cards or Pride awards!
Up to 200K Mbux for taking rDrama public
Use !gaystapo ping for any heterosexual sightings

Invite Internet Celebs HERE!

100k mbux award possible | Four new badges available

Find Rightoid Infighting

500 mbux per post, no limit

Drama: any incident, scene, gaffe, rumor, opinion, or disagreement that is blown entirely out of proportion.

Do your part to keep our community healthy by blowing everything out of proportion and making literally everything as dramatic as possible.

Rules:

  1. Asking to see who saved comments/posts=1 day ban
  2. You must be 18 or older to view this site.
  3. NO RIGHTWING AGENDAPOSTING.
  4. Discord users will be banned on sight.
  5. Don't post anything illegal.
  6. No sexualizing minors, even as a joke. This includes cartoons.
  7. No doxxing.
  8. Using alts to game dramacoin will get you banned.
  9. Supporting free speech is an immediate ban.
  10. Absolutely NO anti-CCP sentiment.
  11. Absolutely NO homophobia, transphobia or furphobia.
  12. Absolutely NO misgendering.
  13. Absolutely NO antisemitism.
  14. Absolutely NO vaccine misinformation.
  15. You are encouraged to post drama you are involved in.
  16. You are encouraged to brigade in bad faith.
  17. You are encouraged to gaslight, to gatekeep, above all else, to girlboss.
  18. Participation implies enthusiastic consent to being mod abused by unstable alcoholic bullies.

Related subreddits:


𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐩 𝐰𝐨𝐳 𝐞𝐫𝐞

Live commit: c995e7c
Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.