Is tolerance intolerant?

[Brian37]

Rev and Max, please stop derailing the thread and take your kwanza celebration to a new thread or PM. Not that I'm being intolerant of it, just that there is a unity of topic here and that's off the rails.

---

The problem is that some traditions conflict with each other, or are considered an offense just by existing in the same place.  Confederate memorials are a secular example of that-- statues don't really do harm, but if you want to get excited enough and paint it as implied aggression and so on, it's not very hard to get there.  I doubt we'd argue that I can show pride in my German heritage by wearing a Nazi uniform to school every day-- even though the actual harm done to others is non-existent.  I couldn't wear shirts with very offending images of Jesus or Muhammad.  I doubt you'd want my kid showing up in school with Satanic imagery, demanding to be allowed to show depictions of a ritual sacrifice at the holiday pageant.

So to some degree, there's really no way to make rules to cover everything.  "You didn't SAY I couldn't slaughter a mouse at school!"  We have to depend on civic principles of toleration, but also of understanding offense.

I'd say in the US, the sense of civil unity is so fractured that people just don't care about each other.  If most people can find a way-- ANY way-- to make the world turn around them for a day, they're likely to do it.  It seems to me that unless the population is unified by a very important goal-- say, a war with China or a massive plague or something, this is unlikely to change.

That was one of the biggest advantages of religion-- that it gave very different people a sense of unity so long as they showed up at the same church on Sunday.  Now-- there really is nothing to unify us except for our mutual distrust and dislike of each other.

---

Nail on the head. 100% on board with your thoughts here.  Civic principles of toleration are what I think is wrong. Tolerate something without understanding is allows potential harm into a society. Mistaking your personal moral authority or your cognitive dissonance without understanding and offense is just as equally bad for society. We have actual harm physical/mental and perceived/potential harm. I agree that more compassion and understanding would help that. So instead of civic principles of tolerance should we be shooting for a respectful and compassionate civic understanding of positions?

You'd probably have to live in the shadow of confederate monuments to understand the harm they do.  It's shit like that, that makes us distrust each other.  You can be fairly confident that a Statue Enthusiast™ won't have your back unless you're the right shade of lipstick.

Is trust necessary for understanding or compassion? Is that something we should strive for. Personally I have to trust some people, but I don't have to trust Jeffry Dahmer to understand his motives. I might need trust to show compassion. idk. That brings up intrinsic worth of compassion and value as a person/society into the equation.

"Trust" is a product of evolution, not old mythology. But it is also a double edge sword. Cooperation is how we form groups, but even in doing that that "trust" can create blindness in those who follow, and lead humans down very dark roads. 

"Trust" cannot be blind, nor should it be blind. It was because humans questioned social norms that the west became more open and grew to value more inclusion, not less.