1 Users appreciate this thread.
Is Tolerance Condescending?
little5 (2016-06-08 23:54:18)You should tolerate opinions on things that are absolutely unknown. When there's something objective, and someone disagrees on a subjective (mostly referring to religious) basis, let them be.. Unless it's negatively affecting other people who don't share the same views. When there's something objective, and someone's just being dumb, correct them.
I really hate the idea of discrediting someone's religion, that is, unless they're using as an excuse to commit murder or an excuse to hurt people/a group. I can see how tolerating it would be considered condescending, but.. Idk. I also hate the idea of making people question their religion.
I don't like messing with other people's beliefs. I do wish people would be more open-minded though.
I think I'm going a little off-track here.
This post has been edited one or more times, the last time was:2016-06-08 23:54:36
Crush42 (2016-06-09 18:49:26)Tolerance can be condescending, as it can be a sign of exhaustion, not caring, giving up; however, it can also be used strategically to obtain peace or some other goal. There's a number of cases for any given situation.
Saying that tolerance is or is not condescending is like saying the human race is stupid or otherworldly wise based on one human; if you say, 'This race is smart, because Benjamin Franklin, Albert Einstein, etc.,' you neglect the spasticated jackwagons that hinder our society. And if you say, 'This race is stupid, because Hillary Clinton, Tim Burton and SMO,' you neglect the people who, regardless of said spasticated jackwagons, brought us the things we take for granted today (like that device you're using to read this). There's just too many times where a certain instance breaks the mould of a viewpoint, to have a consistent one.
Happy, Nemesis?
SMOGamerX (2016-06-09 19:01:53)lmao I just knew that I would find the word SMO and I was right
Remember: Just when the caterpillar thought its world was over, it turned into a butterfly!
Crush42 (2016-06-09 20:06:53)What a coincidence; I just knew that I would find a spasticated jackwagon, and I, too, was right!
Faggot.
SMOGamerX (2016-06-09 21:41:29)Thats right, its you, you just found that out...?
And you, my friend, made yourself look like a faggot
This post has been edited one or more times, the last time was:2016-06-09 22:01:16
Remember: Just when the caterpillar thought its world was over, it turned into a butterfly!
TwilightWinter (2016-06-11 01:05:41)In my opinion, tolerating may or may not be condescending.
You tend to control yourself when you have the authority/power to do something, but you don't, for some reason. Here you're superior, because you're tolerating.
But:
What if you're tolerating because you're ordered to tolerate?
A very good example:
I'm fasting these days because of Ramadan. I know I have to tolerate thirst, hunger (I don't feel hungry at all though), and my mouth's smell, because I'm ordered to. If I don't, I'll be punished, here I'm not superior.
So:
Tolerating may be condescending, but I'm more of the opinion that it is not condescending, it is just controlling yourself, because you have to control yourself, you're ordered to control yourself, or, because you can't do anything about it.
..you can't do anything about it.
If somebody believes in a religion, then all you can do is persuade. Yes, sometimes coercion is also a mean to make someone convert, but the point here is that it is not the real conversion.
And, even if one succeeds in converting someone to his/her religion, he or she doesn't become the authority, or he/she doesn't become superior.
But, if that person wants to stick with their religion, you can't do anything about it, hence no, condescending has nothing to do with religion, in my opinion.
This post has been edited one or more times, the last time was:2016-06-11 01:24:29
✋
little5 (2016-06-13 05:57:32)The people who are persuaded easiest are the ones who already have doubts. If you can make someone question what they believe, then you can probably persuade them.
Although, religion is faith-based, so they may just use faith as an answer and continue as they normally would.
SicSemperTyra (2016-06-13 21:51:18)Every time Liberals advocate caring for others the people they want people to care for include themselves. Every other time they brag about it. People today have lost humility.
brb dying inside
TwilightWinter (2016-06-14 03:59:51)That's what I'm saying, if you can't persuade then you can't do anything about it.
✋
Nemesis (2016-06-14 16:54:19)I found another great video on tolerance.
I know, I know, Onision. But it's not bad.
Log in to submit a comment
Back to forum: Miscellaneous
New registered users today: 8
Newest registered user: Dolce21dsisBack
For the last couple of days I've been talking about tolerance in my political science class. I've come to find tolerance, especially religious tolerance, very condescending. I found this video about religious tolerance by Penn (the magician from Penn and Teller if anyone's heard of that). Anyway, what's your opinions and how are you when it comes to tolerance? Do you challenge others, or do you simply let them dwell in their world of fantasy?