An example of "tolerance"

[brindisi]

Dr Sanity? OK. It would seem Dr. Sanity here likes to broad brush a bit. Apparently the entire religion of Islam is out to get her.

Perhaps.

 

[JustOneWay]

They don't scare me

 

[brindisi]

They don't scare me

Good.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Wrong! Those reactions are based on experience, and are very rational.

Reactions based on experience need not to be rational at all. Studies have shown that, on the basis of experiential learning, subjects can be primed to elicit an implicitly racist response to target individuals. Despite the reaction here being implicit, and being based on experience, it is clearly not rational. Some reactions based on experience are instinctual, as opposed to deliberatively rational. This is one such a reaction.

Please let me know why you're better able to judge rationality than an M.D, Psychiatry. Im sure you'll have a reason.

A few points to be made here. 1. What makes you think that someone with training in Psychiatry is the final authority on what counts as rational? Psychiatrists certainly aren't immune from irrationality. What's more, determining what counts as a rational argument is not something that Psychiatrists directly specialise in, though we'd hope they are certainly competent at it. 2. The blog-post you linked to appeals to common-sense. I'd also hope that a qualified and experienced Psychiatrist knows better than that. There is a distinction between folk psychology and experimental or scientific psychology. Common sense appeals to the former. 3. The argument postulated here zeros on Muslims as though were somehow special, when in fact the argument could just as easily apply to everyone. You say, "but when someone sees a goup of men dressed in Muslim garb he has no way of knowing if they are violent or not." What about the opposite? Is it the case that when you see a group of men dressed in non-Muslim garb that you somehow have a way of knowing that they aren't violent? Of course not.

 

[brindisi]

A few points to be made here. 1. What makes you think that someone with training in Psychiatry is the final authority on what counts as rational?

She may not be, but are you thinking you're the final authority? I think I'll go with the good doctor.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

She may not be, but are you thinking you're the final authority? I think I'll go with the good doctor.

The fallacy of appeal to authority. If the good doctor told you that it was rational for you to jump off a cliff, and I told you that it wasn't, would you still go with the 'good doctor'?

 

[brindisi]

The fallacy of appeal to authority. If the good doctor told you that it was rational for you to jump off a cliff, and I told you that it wasn't, would you still go with the 'good doctor'?

I think the good doctor might remind me that it's a waste of time trying to have a discussion with someone who argues just for the sake of argument.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I think the good doctor might remind me that it's a waste of time trying to have a discussion with someone who argues just for the sake of argument.

A good philosopher might tell you not to rest everything you have on appeal to authority while avoiding objections to your point.

 

[brindisi]

A good philosopher might tell you not to rest everything you have on appeal to authority while avoiding objections to your point.

Perhaps, and if I hear from one I'll let you know.

 

[childofGod1]

Reactions based on experience need not to be rational at all. Studies have shown that, on the basis of experiential learning, subjects can be primed to elicit an implicitly racist response to target individuals. Despite the reaction here being implicit, and being based on experience, it is clearly not rational. Some reactions based on experience are instinctual, as opposed to deliberatively rational. This is one such a reaction.

Let's see here. Some reactions based on experience are not rational, therefore this particular reaction is definitely not rational. Do you see any holes in your logic?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Let's see here. Some reactions based on experience are not rational, therefore this particular reaction is definitely not rational. Do you see any holes in your logic?

Well, you're technically right, but it's a bit out of context. I was raising a counter-point to the notion that all reactions based on experience are rational. This simply isn't true: reactions based on learning need not be rational all the time. The latter part of my response was an opinion (i.e. that this particular reaction is less rational and more instinctual simply because it lacks justification). I've been trying to get people to show me precisely how Juans' fears are of the rational deliberative kind, as opposed to the primitive instinctual kind (remember, if we want to make Juan's fear proscriptive we need a rational justification for why it ought to be the case..). Thus far the best arguments seem to be moot anyway since they could just as easily apply to anyone, and not just Muslims. Juan's fears obviously focus on persons attired in Muslim garb and not everyone, so the argument fails to justify his specific fear (it's too broad for that).

 

[lordbt]

Well, you're technically right, but it's a bit out of context. I was raising a counter-point to the notion that all reactions based on experience are rational. This simply isn't true: reactions based on learning need not be rational all the time. The latter part of my response was an opinion (i.e. that this particular reaction is less rational and more instinctual simply because it lacks justification). I've been trying to get people to show me precisely how Juans' fears are of the rational deliberative kind, as opposed to the primitive instinctual kind (remember, if we want to make Juan's fear proscriptive we need a rational justification for why it ought to be the case..). Thus far the best arguments seem to be moot anyway since they could just as easily apply to anyone, and not just Muslims. Juan's fears obviously focus on persons attired in Muslim garb and not everyone, so the argument fails to justify his specific fear (it's too broad for that).

In your opinion. But I would be interested to know, in your opinion, how many more planes need to be hijacked by muslim radicals and slammed into buildings before the fear of such a thing becomes rational?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

In your opinion. But I would be interested to know, in your opinion, how many more planes need to be hijacked by muslim radicals and slammed into buildings before the fear of such a thing becomes rational?

To repeat Unwanted's point: 4 planes does not a trend make. There have been countless cases of Muslims on air-craft wherein terrorist events have not transpired. What makes you focus solely on what are, statistically speaking, abnormal events?

 

[brindisi]

Tolerance today, is a trait that our society deems quite high. Being tolerant of others is an ideal that has merit in any society. Some in the media, have always shown tolerance in their everyday lives and in their writings. One of these is Juan Williams of NPR. NPR is one of the most liberal outlets in our country and has prided themselves as being some kind of beacon of fairness. So what happened here:

It seems that tolerance only goes one way.

Thoughts?

Yes, tolerance is one thing that liberalism prides itself on. But within liberalism there is an orthodoxy that will tolerate no dissent. The dismissal of Juan Williams from left-leaning NPR is one examle in one aspect of society, but there are others. The inconveneint truth for those on the left is that there is far less tolerance within liberalism than conservatism. Any sign of veering from the liberal narrative must be punished.

On being out, proud and conservative Tammy Bruce

"The real story of bigotry and intolerance is the fact that it lives and thrives on the left. As a gay woman who spent most of her adult life pushing the cart for liberal causes with liberal friends in a liberal city, I found that sexism, racism and homophobia are staples in the liberal world. The huge irony is liberals spend every ounce of energy promoting the notion that they are the banner carriers of individualism and personal freedom, yet the hammer comes down on anyone who dares not to conform to, or who dissents even in part from, the liberal agenda."

"Think about what would happen if you did act up? If you dared to say you like Sarah Palin, or admire Margaret Thatcher, or think global warming is a hoax, or think Bill Clinton is a sexual predator, or that George W Bush isn't to blame for everything, or that Barack Obama has absolutely no clue what he's doing, you know there would be a price to pay. Odds are that your "liberal" friends would very liberally hate you. At the very least, being shunned would be your new experience, condemning you to suffer that horrific liberal malady called social death."

"So, when it comes to my comfort level as a conservative who happens to be gay, here's what I know: while many conservatives are people of faith and their religion promotes a very different point of view than mine on homosexuality (and a few other things!), I have found conservatives to be more tolerant, more curious and more understanding of those who are different to them than I ever did when ensconced in US liberal leadership."

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The inconveneint truth for those on the left is that there is far less tolerance within liberalism than conservatism.

This is an interesting claim. While I do not doubt that, on all sides, there is a pressure to conform, I have cause to doubt the claim that there is 'far less tolerance within liberalism than conservatism'. Studies have shown that conservatives are more prone to endorse the Purity, In-group loyalty and Authority/Respect domains of morality than liberals who are more prone to emphasise the importance of Harm/Care and Fairness/Reciprocity. In addition, the phenomenon of Right-wing Authoritarianism represents the tendency to submit to established authorities. How this all bears on tolerance... well, you take a guess.

 

[brindisi]

This is an interesting claim. While I do not doubt that, on all sides, there is a pressure to conform, I have cause to doubt the claim that there is 'far less tolerance within liberalism than conservatism'. Studies have shown that conservatives are more prone to endorse the Purity, In-group loyalty and Authority/Respect domains of morality than liberals who are more prone to emphasise the importance of Harm/Care and Fairness/Reciprocity. In addition, the phenomenon of Right-wing Authoritarianism represents the tendency to submit to established authorities. How this all bears on tolerance... well, you take a guess.

While you may doubt the claim, I suggest you read the article linked to in order to understand the experience of someone who knows from the inside. Or ask Juan Williams: is the more tolerant organization the liberal NPR or the conservative Fox news.

 

[DaisyDay]

Yes, tolerance is one thing that liberalism prides itself on.

You attribute emotions to a school of thought?

But within liberalism there is an orthodoxy that will tolerate no dissent.

Really? That's why politicians are constantly ousted from the Liberal Party as LINOs or Democrats for being DINOs...no, I don't think that happens a lot.

The dismissal of Juan Williams from left-leaning NPR is one examle in one aspect of society, but there are others. The inconveneint truth for those on the left is that there is far less tolerance within liberalism than conservatism. Any sign of veering from the liberal narrative must be punished.

Ah yes, a convenient anecdote is proof of your absolute.

Oh wait, you have two examples!

On being out, proud and conservative Tammy Bruce

"The real story of bigotry and intolerance is the fact that it lives and thrives on the left. As a gay woman who spent most of her adult life pushing the cart for liberal causes with liberal friends in a liberal city, I found that sexism, racism and homophobia are staples in the liberal world. The huge irony is liberals spend every ounce of energy promoting the notion that they are the banner carriers of individualism and personal freedom, yet the hammer comes down on anyone who dares not to conform to, or who dissents even in part from, the liberal agenda."

"Think about what would happen if you did act up? If you dared to say you like Sarah Palin, or admire Margaret Thatcher, or think global warming is a hoax, or think Bill Clinton is a sexual predator, or that George W Bush isn't to blame for everything, or that Barack Obama has absolutely no clue what he's doing, you know there would be a price to pay. Odds are that your "liberal" friends would very liberally hate you. At the very least, being shunned would be your new experience, condemning you to suffer that horrific liberal malady called social death."

Think what would happen if? Odds? So this is all speculative nonsense.

"So, when it comes to my comfort level as a conservative who happens to be gay, here's what I know: while many conservatives are people of faith and their religion promotes a very different point of view than mine on homosexuality (and a few other things!), I have found conservatives to be more tolerant, more curious and more understanding of those who are different to them than I ever did when ensconced in US liberal leadership."

Should I trot out counter examples?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

While you may doubt the claim, I suggest you read the article linked to in order to understand the experience of someone who knows from the inside. Or ask Juan Williams: is the more tolerant organization the liberal NPR or the conservative Fox news.

PM Sniderman et al. (1989) 'Principled tolerance and the American Mass Public'. British Journal of Political Science, 19.

 

[brindisi]

You attribute emotions to a school of thought?

Ah yes, a convenient anecdote is proof of your absolute.

Ah...it seems Tammy has hit a nerve.

 

[brindisi]

Really? That's why politicians are constantly ousted from the Liberal Party as LINOs or Democrats for being DINOs...no, I don't think that happens a lot.

Does the name Joseph Lieberman ring any bells for you?