Vik Drama: Round 3
- Thread starter MikeH
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
This site may earn a commission from merchant links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
I'm wondering what will "Round 4" be. This one has provided a lot of entertainment during my morning coffee.
Why are so many pages devoted to vague descriptions of intolerance?
Can we try and clear this up and move on with the thread?
Quote from Wiki
"Paradox of tolerance
The tolerance paradox arises from a problem that a tolerant person might be antagonistic toward intolerance, hence intolerant of it. The tolerant individual would then be by definition intolerant of intolerance."
How a tolerant person chooses to deal with intolerance will be different for everyone. Some will prefer to only act when the intolerance directly threatens their or other peoples liberties.
Others will act as soon as intolerance opens it's mouth.
By definition if a tolerant person becomes antagonistic towards a intolerance person, then they are also intolerant.
However this is by definition only.
In real life things are more complicated.
Like any paradox it is open to deep philosophical discussion. Something I don't see happening in this thread
Can we try and clear this up and move on with the thread?
Quote from Wiki
"Paradox of tolerance
The tolerance paradox arises from a problem that a tolerant person might be antagonistic toward intolerance, hence intolerant of it. The tolerant individual would then be by definition intolerant of intolerance."
How a tolerant person chooses to deal with intolerance will be different for everyone. Some will prefer to only act when the intolerance directly threatens their or other peoples liberties.
Others will act as soon as intolerance opens it's mouth.
By definition if a tolerant person becomes antagonistic towards a intolerance person, then they are also intolerant.
However this is by definition only.
In real life things are more complicated.
Like any paradox it is open to deep philosophical discussion. Something I don't see happening in this thread
And I don't buy, read, shop at, etc. Orson Scott Card, Chick-Fil-A, Hobby Lobby or Lowes any more.
Are you truly that stupid? Intolerance of intolerance, bigotry, hatred, lies, etc. etc. is not the same as the original intolerance, bigotry, hatred, lies, etc.
You still don't get it. Just as Vik is free to spew his nonsense/lies, others are free to point out Vik's lies, bigotry, hatred, etc.. To claim otherwise is being hypocritical and stupid.
Explorer
He seldomly knows...
- Joined
- May 23, 2009
- Messages
- 6,619
- Reaction score
- 1,162
Since Orson Scott Card came up...
The problem is that people are equating intolerance (a very broad word) with bigotry (a much narrower word).
All bigotry is intolerance, but not all intolerance is bigotry. Captain America fought the Nazis, but you wouldn't call him a bigot. (Well, unless you're an idiot, and I know we've seen a few of those in this discussion. *laugh*)
All ducks are birds, but not all birds are ducks. Insisting that they are the same only proves one to be either an idiot... or someone who is deliberately lying in a sneaky way.
The problem is that people are equating intolerance (a very broad word) with bigotry (a much narrower word).
All bigotry is intolerance, but not all intolerance is bigotry. Captain America fought the Nazis, but you wouldn't call him a bigot. (Well, unless you're an idiot, and I know we've seen a few of those in this discussion. *laugh*)
All ducks are birds, but not all birds are ducks. Insisting that they are the same only proves one to be either an idiot... or someone who is deliberately lying in a sneaky way.
Kwert
Well-Known Member
It seems the key thing people are doing is assuming that tolerance is equivalent to pacifism. Two very different things.
JoshuaVonFlash
SSBRO.org regular
Pacifism means to oppose war and violence when resolving a conflict, there is no war going on here. Just the masses speaking their minds and voicing their disgust at vik's comments. But in this case being tolerant of his views would be almost the same as taking a passive approach. Now take what I just said in my last sentence and apply it to say a person with considerate power saying "all blacks are subhuman" or something to that effect and the line between the two is blurred.
Kwert
Well-Known Member
I suppose I should clarify. What I mean is that being an advocate for tolerance does not mean you have to be accepting of other intolerant views, or passively accept that other people hold these views.
Explorer
He seldomly knows...
- Joined
- May 23, 2009
- Messages
- 6,619
- Reaction score
- 1,162
Wait... when was someone exhorting others to violence in this topic, or being upset when violence and physical force weren't employed?
In looking at this topic, here's what I keep seeing crop up as assumptions:
Intolerance of bigotry is bigotry.
Vik has a right to speak his mind, but you all should not speak your minds.
Vik has the right to regard some of you, your friends and/or your family members as less than people, but you don't have the right to question patronizing him.
If only you knew how bigotry, slavery, and other things are normal in other parts of the world, even if those subject to them don't agree with such treatment, then you'd be okay with those things happening in your part of the world.
----
Best of all, typically those who see Vik's bigotry and his attempts at extortion to silence criticism as bad things have read this topic from the beginning, and so they notice those who arrive every page or so and who make the above assumptions. Those who come in like that don't realize that they're fitting a particular trend, but everyone else sees it immediately.
Reductio ad absurdum:
Being an advocate for tolerance of slavery doesn't mean you have to be accepting of slavery.
Being an advocate for tolerance of slavery doesn't mean that you passively accept that others engage in slavery.
Those don't seem true. You might be wrong.
In looking at this topic, here's what I keep seeing crop up as assumptions:
Intolerance of bigotry is bigotry.
Vik has a right to speak his mind, but you all should not speak your minds.
Vik has the right to regard some of you, your friends and/or your family members as less than people, but you don't have the right to question patronizing him.
If only you knew how bigotry, slavery, and other things are normal in other parts of the world, even if those subject to them don't agree with such treatment, then you'd be okay with those things happening in your part of the world.
----
Best of all, typically those who see Vik's bigotry and his attempts at extortion to silence criticism as bad things have read this topic from the beginning, and so they notice those who arrive every page or so and who make the above assumptions. Those who come in like that don't realize that they're fitting a particular trend, but everyone else sees it immediately.
Reductio ad absurdum:
Being an advocate for tolerance of slavery doesn't mean you have to be accepting of slavery.
Being an advocate for tolerance of slavery doesn't mean that you passively accept that others engage in slavery.
Those don't seem true. You might be wrong.
JoshuaVonFlash
SSBRO.org regular
Ah, I took that the wrong way.
GunpointMetal
Well-Known Member
33 pages of figuring out what kind of piece of shit this guy is and whether or not we have a right to say anything about....yay the internet.
If you REALLY think that being "intolerant of intolerance" is the same thing as being intolerant in the first place, you're probably a ....ing moron, or you just like talking shit on the internet to get people going.
If you REALLY think that being "intolerant of intolerance" is the same thing as being intolerant in the first place, you're probably a ....ing moron, or you just like talking shit on the internet to get people going.
JoshuaVonFlash
SSBRO.org regular
Wrong thread. 
InHiding
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Messages
- 506
- Reaction score
- 548
Not commenting on the matter, but here's some recent news and some background to help understand the society this guy is coming from:
Belarus Is Planning To Bring Back Serfdom - Business Insider
Belarus Is Planning To Bring Back Serfdom - Business Insider
yeah, but everyone knows Lukachenko is ....ed in the head
Explorer
He seldomly knows...
- Joined
- May 23, 2009
- Messages
- 6,619
- Reaction score
- 1,162
I had a discussion today with someone regarding mending fences, and being able to say that one was wrong.
That led to me thinking about this topic, so I moseyed on over to the site.
It's a little sad that the last non-owner post seems to be from May 30th, and the one before that on March 15th. It's like a ghost town.
I think it's a little forlorn, but if one looked at it from another angle, one might think it's a matter of sticking to one's principles, no matter what the cost. Holding oneself to be superior by an accident of birth isn't a personal principle for me, but it is definitely something which folks might cling to.
Either that, or it's just hard to admit that one is/was wrong.
Years ago, on a forgotten show called "All in the Family," Archie explained to Meathead how you father is never wrong, and how he beats you when you deserve it and teaches you what is right and wrong. It was a very impassioned speech in defense of where Archie had learned his attitudes. And I've been thinking about it, that prejudices are not something which children come to naturally.
Remember that Cheerios commercial that upset a lot of Americans? Here's how kids think about stuff like that before others try to poison those open minds...
These kids give me hope that as the bigots choose to build walls, their kids might still be able to escape those barriers.
That led to me thinking about this topic, so I moseyed on over to the site.
It's a little sad that the last non-owner post seems to be from May 30th, and the one before that on March 15th. It's like a ghost town.
I think it's a little forlorn, but if one looked at it from another angle, one might think it's a matter of sticking to one's principles, no matter what the cost. Holding oneself to be superior by an accident of birth isn't a personal principle for me, but it is definitely something which folks might cling to.
Either that, or it's just hard to admit that one is/was wrong.
Years ago, on a forgotten show called "All in the Family," Archie explained to Meathead how you father is never wrong, and how he beats you when you deserve it and teaches you what is right and wrong. It was a very impassioned speech in defense of where Archie had learned his attitudes. And I've been thinking about it, that prejudices are not something which children come to naturally.
Remember that Cheerios commercial that upset a lot of Americans? Here's how kids think about stuff like that before others try to poison those open minds...
These kids give me hope that as the bigots choose to build walls, their kids might still be able to escape those barriers.
TheOddGoat
Well-Known Member
I'm calling Vik getting caught in an... Ironic situation... And losing the people who support him because of his comments.
