"Tolerance" Amongst Different People

Why are you trying to change these people? Do you want them to be more like you?
Why can't you just just learn to tolerate them as they are?

Don't get all high and mighty, like I said you are yet to perfect tolerance, so it's a bit of a joke for you to expect more from others.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'd stay. Have you ever been for umra or hajj?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hah! Well, I haven't been to Hajj yet, but the crowded Friday prayers in Istanbul sometimes got a little fishy.

Especially the people who wore no socks.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Am I? Where did you read that?

Again, where did I say that?

Because I do a lot more then just tolerate them.

No, it is more like you have no idea what tolerance even is. So I'm not sure how can you say anything about that. Huuumm....

 

1 example:

The whole point of this thread is you telling people to be different than what they already are. You don't like the way they are, and you want to change them.
That's intolerance, it's akin to me chasing circus people around with soap and nagging them to let me wash their leotards.
From my perspective all I'm doing is generously offering favours, but really I'm infringing on their right to be dirty.

You're trying to make people "better", you deem it a noble cause, but that's just your particular perspective. If you expect people to fall in line in accordance with your perspective you are exhibitting fascist tendencies.

 

I beg to differ:

"tol·er·ance
–noun
1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
2. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.
3. interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint.
4. the act or capacity of enduring; endurance: My tolerance of noise is limited."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tolerance

While I agree that the word tolerance has gotten a slightly negative sound to it over the years, the definition says differently.
See, you are defining it as under point 4. which is not the way it's meant when we are talking about, for instance, a tolerant community or country.
Definitions 1 to 3 are the one's that are appropriate in that case.

 

Where do I say that? Not once in the thread I say people ought to be a certain way. The entire discussion is centered on the fact that tolerance alone cannot keep the world in peace. Don't believe me? Just look at the planet.

I don't agree with many people. However, I still care about them. And no, I don't want to change them. Diversity is the one of the keys to our survival. Why would I want to change him.

No, you don't understand what I'm saying.

Let's say we DO want to change them. WHY do we want to change them? Is there a logical reason? Also, is your perception of them accurate?

Ok, let's say your perception is accurate. Why would you want to change them? Would such a change benefit them? If the change would benefit them, is your desire a good thing or a bad thing?

Let's say your perception is not accurate, but, of course, you believe it is. Why do you have such a perception? What could possibly change your perspective? Maybe knowing the truth?


You see... people make a big deal out of this. But when it comes to the truth, the bottomline here is that what really matters is the truth. If you want to actually help people, then that is a good thing. If you hate them and wish them bad, then that's a bad thing for everyone. It's all a matter of whether our perceptions are true or not and whether our intentions are good or not.

I don't. However, if someone is in danger because of their beliefs, isn't it a good thing if I try to help them?

It depends, really. Is my perception correct? You seem to believe there are no correct perceptions. However, that's not the case and, in fact, that's the point. Everyone thinks their perception is the correct one. That's why there's hatred and other stuff. You think your perception of the circus people is correct. You also think that your perception of myself is correct. However, do you really think that's the case?



The difference here between me and you is that I'm unconditionally caring towards everyone and that I accept that all my perceptions are just my own subjective perceptions. For a matter of fact, that's why my acceptance of others is unconditional, because I know that my perceptions are not always accurate. You, on the other hand, don't unconditionally care towards others and justify your behaviour by stating that you are free to not care about others. While I respect other people's freedom, at the end of the day one must logically discern which option is the best for everyone, including yourself. Is the option of unconditionally caring about everyonr and accepting our own limitations the better option or is the option of not unconditionally caring and "tolerate" those who in our own subjective perceptions are incorrect and "bad", in order to supposedly preserve our "freedom"?

 

The original meaning of the word is number 4. The others were just attempts to make it sound better.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Says who ? And even if so, people use it like in 1, 2 and 3 all the time.

 

Truthseeker is actualy right on one point, tolerance does equate to enduring something unpleasant.
It is a word which does imply negativity.

I think the fact those other definitions are in a dictionary is only an example of disgusting political correctness, I hate how they think they can change reality to make people feel better.

To tolerate is to peacefully endure. Period.

My point is, to demand more than tolerance from people is to descend back towards intolerance yourself.
Tolerance is the ceiling.

You can't make people like things they innately don't like, you can expect them to refrain from actively trying to destroy or change what they don't like, that is tolerance. It works because it only requires that you don't do bad things, it doesn't require you to do anything you don't want to do or change any beliefs you have the right to posess.
Just don't infringe on anyone else, it's easy.

And it does not fall short, whether you can understand it or not you are proposing fascism when you aim to "improve upon" tolerance.
You're gearing things towards a certain mindset that you harbour and your goal is to get others thinking like you. I know you're %100 convinced it's the right mindset to have and that the whole world would be better off if everyone had that mindset, but tolerance is all about understanding that others are different and that even if you don't like the way they are, they have a right to be that way, and you have no right to change them, you have to peacefully endure them the way they are, even if you don't like it.

So you see you are yet to reach the pinnacle of tolerance, you say you exceed it, but it's only for certain groups of people (mostly ethnic minorities no doubt, god love you), not biggots I'd wager.

 

Perhaps. I'm guessing you are just wording your own interpretation of 'tolerance' which, of course, is heavily influenced by it's usage by other people.

Tolerance can also mean 'to allow something others see as enduring something unpleasant'.
The Netherlands for example is kind of known for it's tolerance. Gay marriage etc. is allowed and this is not viewed as enduring something unpleasant. Maybe by some biggots, but not by the general population.

 

I can barely stand Enmos.

Would never tolerate him.

 

You LOVE me. Why are you so scared to admit it ?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Cuz you wont go down on me.

 

I might, if you look like your avatar.. I somehow doubt that though

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

No it doesn't only YOU make it seem that way because you say so.

 

That's because they don't just tolerate it. They go a step further.

 

It's called tolerance.
1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.

 

No, it's not. Tolerance can even accomodate hatred. Tolerance is only an absence of harmful action towards another individual. That's all.

 

For example, the Nazis tolerated the Jews before WWII.