Watching Destiny watch trannies talk about Destiny makes me hate trannies. Oh my fucking god these people are fucking unreal. Talk about paradox of tolerance.
It’s kind of ironic because it’s usually trannies themselves that invoke the paradox of tolerance for why no one should tolerate “Nazis”.
Follow
💀
@dave @crunklord420
I think the LGBT movement perverted the meaning of the word "tolerate" and this twisted definition is what actually causes the "paradox of tolerance".
Just thought about this now, so maybe there's a flaw in my thinking, but I don't think tolerating something means accepting or agreeing with that thing in any way. It doesn't mean you can't criticize it or you can't actively show you disagree with it. It just means you don't get to attack an individual over who their are or what they think. You don't get to try to fire someone or ruin their life. You don't get to go on Twitter or Twitch and say "we need to cancel this fucker". You don't get to bully someone, you don't get to harass them, you don't get to do what so much of the internet has devolved into doing.
Tolerating someone/something should basically be the definition of the Christian saying: "hate the sin, not the sinner". Meanwhile, I think the LGBT movement managed to transform "tolerance" into "you can NEVER say anything bad about a homosexual or homosexuality, or else you're intolerant".
Their version of "tolerance" seems to have some amount of censorship and compelled speech in it. I think we need to return tolerance to "I'm gonna criticize the heck of what you do, but I won't try to kill you".
@Philoxenus @alyx @dave the paradox is tolerance is retarded and so is Karl Popper. It's so comically laughable. You may as well just say "it's morally correct to kill people I don't like", it's at least more intellectually honest.
Philosophers are the biggest retards in the world. Here's a simple fact, houses have windows, cars have windows, therefore houses are cars. It's really just that fucking simple, and if you disagree you need to read 800 of metaphysics.
Philosophers are the biggest retards in the world. Here's a simple fact, houses have windows, cars have windows, therefore houses are cars. It's really just that fucking simple, and if you disagree you need to read 800 of metaphysics.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave
> the paradox is tolerance is retarded
It seems worth contemplating though. Would you agree that you have to draw a line somewhere? It seems reasonable to agree with the overall principle while disagreeing with his reasoning on where to draw the line.
What is it possible to tolerate? Someone calling you a faggot? Someone making vague threats? Specific threats? Someone actively attempting to kill you?
> the paradox is tolerance is retarded
It seems worth contemplating though. Would you agree that you have to draw a line somewhere? It seems reasonable to agree with the overall principle while disagreeing with his reasoning on where to draw the line.
What is it possible to tolerate? Someone calling you a faggot? Someone making vague threats? Specific threats? Someone actively attempting to kill you?
@roboneko @alyx @dave @Philoxenus no it's the most hypersubjective thing ever. You could say that about anything and anyone. You need to have objective definitions for somethings. The word "object" is antithetical to philosophy. Frankly I'm just a Boltzmann brain so everyone else doesn't actually exist and it's morally and ethically correct to kill anyone I personally find inconvenient.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave
> it's the most hypersubjective thing ever
What's subjective? Where to draw the line? I assume that you're willing to agree that you can't personally tolerate someone that runs at your unarmed self with a knife unprovoked. There's a line *somewhere*.
Not all useful concepts are perfectly objective things on which you can base razor sharp rules.
> Frankly I'm just a Boltzmann brain so everyone else doesn't actually exist and it's morally and ethically correct to kill anyone I personally find inconvenient.
What's your point? The paradox of tolerance is framed in terms of real world cause and effect, not bizarre philosophical ponderings. It's merely observing that adhering to a particular set of principles isn't realistic past a certain point. The person who values pacifism grappling with the reality of not being willing to stand there while someone kills them. The vegetarian whose stranded in the wilderness eating meat to survive while waiting for rescue. Etc.
> it's the most hypersubjective thing ever
What's subjective? Where to draw the line? I assume that you're willing to agree that you can't personally tolerate someone that runs at your unarmed self with a knife unprovoked. There's a line *somewhere*.
Not all useful concepts are perfectly objective things on which you can base razor sharp rules.
> Frankly I'm just a Boltzmann brain so everyone else doesn't actually exist and it's morally and ethically correct to kill anyone I personally find inconvenient.
What's your point? The paradox of tolerance is framed in terms of real world cause and effect, not bizarre philosophical ponderings. It's merely observing that adhering to a particular set of principles isn't realistic past a certain point. The person who values pacifism grappling with the reality of not being willing to stand there while someone kills them. The vegetarian whose stranded in the wilderness eating meat to survive while waiting for rescue. Etc.
@roboneko @alyx @dave @Philoxenus clearly I've already drawn the line at tranniess and globohomo. Ironically the same people who invoke the "paradox of tolerance". So I guess the real answer is the line is whenever anyone invokes the paradox of tolerance, those people fall into the paradox of tolerance, which means I fall into the paradox of tolerance, which means I must be killed.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave
It's also dumb because it assumes society is tolerant as is when it's not. You can't just go around publicly masturbating even though it doesn't hurt anybody. Society doesn't tolerate it. Hell, it doesn't tolerate just walking around pantsless.
Should I therefore start blowing up police stations because I can't tolerate their intolerance?
It's also dumb because it assumes society is tolerant as is when it's not. You can't just go around publicly masturbating even though it doesn't hurt anybody. Society doesn't tolerate it. Hell, it doesn't tolerate just walking around pantsless.
Should I therefore start blowing up police stations because I can't tolerate their intolerance?
@tard @crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave > You can't just go around publicly masturbating even though it doesn't hurt anybody.
It does hurt people though. "It doesn't hurt you" is a fallacy.
It does hurt people though. "It doesn't hurt you" is a fallacy.
@fedimcfedface @tard @Philoxenus @alyx @dave can you prove masturbating in public hurts anyone? Can you define masturbating, public and hurts for me? I'm a philosopher and therefore retarded.
@fedimcfedface @Philoxenus @alyx @crunklord420 @dave
If you mean because it makes them uncomfortable, then that's subjective. I could say they're not hiding their faces makes me uncomfortable. Should I start chopping their heads off for being intolerant?
If you mean because it makes them uncomfortable, then that's subjective. I could say they're not hiding their faces makes me uncomfortable. Should I start chopping their heads off for being intolerant?
@tard @fedimcfedface @Philoxenus @alyx @crunklord420 @dave I can make this whole discussion very easy for you. You live in a society. If you violate public societal norms people will hate you, and eventually will take action to stop you from violating those norms. It doesn't matter what the ritual is, it will be enforced.
Confucius threw men in prison for walking on the same side of the street as women, and was a beloved governor. Why? He was stamping out the degeneracy of the day.
Confucius threw men in prison for walking on the same side of the street as women, and was a beloved governor. Why? He was stamping out the degeneracy of the day.
@software @tard @Philoxenus @alyx @dave @fedimcfedface WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY
Yet trannies want to redefine society in significant ways despite the majority of the population, even at a local level, disagree with the fundamental premise. They seek to create endless kafkatraps and harness government and corporate powers to enforce it. Being a gross troon is not a norm. Yet if you even point it out it invokes the paradox of tolerance? Wouldn't it be the opposite? Again, we enter the hypersubjective mobius strip of troonery.
Yet trannies want to redefine society in significant ways despite the majority of the population, even at a local level, disagree with the fundamental premise. They seek to create endless kafkatraps and harness government and corporate powers to enforce it. Being a gross troon is not a norm. Yet if you even point it out it invokes the paradox of tolerance? Wouldn't it be the opposite? Again, we enter the hypersubjective mobius strip of troonery.
@tard @Philoxenus @alyx @dave @fedimcfedface @software it came from The Cathedral. The Cathedral is one of the most powerful power structures in SOCIETY.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave @fedimcfedface @software
So you're saying the cathedral created trannies, and not that trannies hijacked its power structures?
So you're saying the cathedral created trannies, and not that trannies hijacked its power structures?
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave @fedimcfedface @software
Putting on my soyjak face, does this mean trannies are like the Uruk-hai of the Cathedral? The most lethal of their nigger cattle?
Putting on my soyjak face, does this mean trannies are like the Uruk-hai of the Cathedral? The most lethal of their nigger cattle?
@tard @Philoxenus @alyx @dave @fedimcfedface @software gender dysphoria is probably a real thing, meaning it's been around forever, a mental illness. But you asked "why are they so powerful?". It's because GENDER IDEOLOGY (separate from medicalized gender dysphoria) is taught, backed and promoted by the cathedral. The cathedral is very powerful, look at how the "powerful" shrink away from something so basic in terror. While literal Africans laugh and look like they're being asked the dumbest question on earth. The only one happy to be asked is a cathedral trained gender ideologist.
@crunklord420 @tard @alyx @dave @Philoxenus @fedimcfedface @software The logical followup question then is "why does the cathedral institutionally back this?" And the best answer I've come up with is that this debate is the intellectual equivalent of digging holes and filling them back in again, so it gives the upper-middle class something to argue about while the elites keep looting.
@InceptionState @alyx @dave @Philoxenus @fedimcfedface @software @tard if your goal is to destroy culture so you can reform the population of the world into a docile, homogenized and universal consumer class it makes sense.
@crunklord420 @InceptionState @Philoxenus @alyx @dave @software @tard And once the oligarchs have this consumer class (they already do) then the consumers will accept anything, no matter how repulsive, as a tradeoff for their ability to consume.
They will allow their own homes with their families inside to be burnt to the ground as long as they get to buy new curtains for the ashes.
They will allow their own homes with their families inside to be burnt to the ground as long as they get to buy new curtains for the ashes.
@InceptionState @crunklord420 @tard @alyx @dave @Philoxenus @fedimcfedface @software Don’t forget the part about destroying white society. The synagogue is very much into being part of that transition.
Fren
@crunklord420 @tard @Philoxenus @alyx @dave @fedimcfedface @software
"What is a woman?" is only a question posed by the retarded. If somebody can't readily tell you the answer; "XX-Chromosone human being", they're dumber than dirt.
"What is a woman?" is only a question posed by the retarded. If somebody can't readily tell you the answer; "XX-Chromosone human being", they're dumber than dirt.
@tard @crunklord420 @alyx @dave @fedimcfedface @software because the right person at the right time suddenly decides they want to fall on their sword. 😔
https://news.yahoo.com/republican-vetoes-transgender-sports-bans-101647081.html
https://news.yahoo.com/republican-vetoes-transgender-sports-bans-101647081.html
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave @fedimcfedface @tard Troons are fighting a culture war where they've dug in and forged allies with people who normalized them well before any IRL troon shit ever happened.
The term LGB>>>T<<< started being used in 1988. It's taken close to 40 years for them to grow their acceptance bubble from gays, to progressives, to liberals, and create pockets of society where they are a part of the collective norm.
What you are seeing is how society changes those norms, in action. It, like many modern changes, fucking sucks.
The term LGB>>>T<<< started being used in 1988. It's taken close to 40 years for them to grow their acceptance bubble from gays, to progressives, to liberals, and create pockets of society where they are a part of the collective norm.
What you are seeing is how society changes those norms, in action. It, like many modern changes, fucking sucks.
@software @Philoxenus @alyx @crunklord420 @dave @fedimcfedface
Yes, I know. My point is there is no paradox. Society is intolerant, as is everyone. The "paradox of intolerance" thing is usually referring to a narrowly defined category of intolerance (right-wing racism/fascism etc...) and is thus entirely subjective.
Yes, I know. My point is there is no paradox. Society is intolerant, as is everyone. The "paradox of intolerance" thing is usually referring to a narrowly defined category of intolerance (right-wing racism/fascism etc...) and is thus entirely subjective.
@tard @Philoxenus @alyx @crunklord420 @dave No I mean because it forces the acceptance of the non-human.
Human is the natural desire to create, this desire reduced to its simplest form is the desider to procreate in environment you have created where your offspring are protected from dangers.
Masterbation, sodomy, kikes, et al are antithetical to this desire, they are the non-human.
Human is the natural desire to create, this desire reduced to its simplest form is the desider to procreate in environment you have created where your offspring are protected from dangers.
Masterbation, sodomy, kikes, et al are antithetical to this desire, they are the non-human.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave
Redditors and HN types like mentioning it a lot too which is a big hint that it's illogical bullshit.
Redditors and HN types like mentioning it a lot too which is a big hint that it's illogical bullshit.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave the problem with modern philosophers for me is that they forget their place in the world. They think they are of highest importance in their own, whereas philosophy is just a service like plumbing. They exist to serve and give perspectives for other people, just as servants, nothing more. They forget that nowadays.
@roboneko @alyx @dave @Philoxenus @crunklord420 Idk man, kinda. But i don't see that same of misplaced self-esteem when it comes to plumbers, electricians, butchers. They don't think they are the best in the world and pivotal to everything, though arguably they are more important than philosophers in practice.
@emtm @Philoxenus @alyx @crunklord420 @dave True, I had more office job types in mind when I wrote that. I guess my objection is more that people in general seem to develop inflated egos given social status and that's what seems "wrong" to me. I'm pessimistic that tradies would remain humble if the broader social situation were to suddenly change.
@emtm @dave @Philoxenus @crunklord420
>the problem with modern philosophers
Maybe we have a different understanding of the word modern, but I'm confident what you're describing has been a problem for longer than just modern times.
@alyx @dave @Philoxenus @crunklord420 yeah i guess it was similar before. but i feel as if it has gotten worse in modern times. maybe just biased since i am alive nowadays and wasn't before.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave I think your interpretation, and the interpretation of all the random libs who cite the paradox of tolerance, is wrong.
The gestalt of the argument that people miss is that when you say "the interant cannot be tolerated and must be removed by force", the intolerant has a specific, inflexible definition that is required for this to be a paradox in the first place.
An intolerant man is not a man who says trannies are bad.
An intolerant man is not a man who says transitioning should be illegal.
An intolerant man is not even a man who seeks to build a political platform on the basis of rounding up the trannies.
An intolerant man is a man who meets tolerant (non-violent) opposition to his ideas with violence.
This is the actual explanation for the paradox, from Karl Popper, and not some random twitter retard, and it's information everyone already intuitively knows when it comes to other topics, such as pacifism. If a society attempts to maximize some trait, and that very trait can be exploited by an enemy to destroy that society, then no successful state can maximize that trait, by definition.
The gestalt of the argument that people miss is that when you say "the interant cannot be tolerated and must be removed by force", the intolerant has a specific, inflexible definition that is required for this to be a paradox in the first place.
An intolerant man is not a man who says trannies are bad.
An intolerant man is not a man who says transitioning should be illegal.
An intolerant man is not even a man who seeks to build a political platform on the basis of rounding up the trannies.
An intolerant man is a man who meets tolerant (non-violent) opposition to his ideas with violence.
This is the actual explanation for the paradox, from Karl Popper, and not some random twitter retard, and it's information everyone already intuitively knows when it comes to other topics, such as pacifism. If a society attempts to maximize some trait, and that very trait can be exploited by an enemy to destroy that society, then no successful state can maximize that trait, by definition.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave And for the record, I'm not defending Popper's ideas, just explaining them. Popper is an anti-social recluse who values society far too little given how necessary an advanced modern society is for people like him to exist and prosper.
@crunklord420 @Philoxenus @alyx @dave
Here's another fun fact:
"Color is a spectrum. Therefore, red does not exist."
Here's another fun fact:
"Color is a spectrum. Therefore, red does not exist."
@ScatmansWorld @crunklord420 @alyx @dave So true! Especially if you have serious colourblindness. Qualia isn't real. It is literally a fake thing someone made up one day.
I haven't got to reading his work directly, I've mostly been reading David Deutsch who built heavily off Karl Popper but from what I've read the paradox of tolerance had to do with not tolerating factions within society who try to spread their ideas through means outside of debate. In Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy you can easily point to the paramilitary organisations of the black shirts and brown shirts.These intolerant means of gaining political power in absence of debate shouldn't be tolerated was my interpretation of the point. In reality the arguments is probably somewhere in the middle.
I think you can easily analogise this to how they bar people from debate by taking their platforms and their money. Karl Popper's politics seem really wacky and a lot weaker than his philosophy of science work. Academics really like to become leading voices of politics. Soros' involvement surely doesn't help at all.