@Squorlple@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldEnglish • 2 months agoOpinions on the internetlemmy.worldimagemessage-square31fedilinkarrow-up1265arrow-down19
arrow-up1256arrow-down1imageOpinions on the internetlemmy.world@Squorlple@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldEnglish • 2 months agomessage-square31fedilink
minus-squareDemelinkfedilink17•2 months agoIt stops being a paradox if you treat tolerance as a contract between parties in a society, instead of a principle. They break that contract and thus are no longer covered by it.
minus-square@Aurix@lemmy.worldlinkfedilink-4•2 months agoWhat if the other party in question is of the opinion they didn’t break it, yet the other claims it has been. Who gets to decide it?
minus-squareDemelinkfedilink8•2 months agoThat’s a different question. However society enforces norms. Personally I would prefer some consensus seeking mechanism.
It stops being a paradox if you treat tolerance as a contract between parties in a society, instead of a principle. They break that contract and thus are no longer covered by it.
What if the other party in question is of the opinion they didn’t break it, yet the other claims it has been. Who gets to decide it?
That’s a different question. However society enforces norms. Personally I would prefer some consensus seeking mechanism.
Welcome to social contract theory.