Philosophy
Veil of Ignorance
- RLSharp
This archived discussion is "read only" due to the absence of an active Feature Writer/moderator for this topic.
» RLSharp - Pure Rawls
In response to Pure Rawls posted by redback:
No, I didn't mean forced tolerance, where you have to tolerate something because you are a powerless minority. I was thinking more about tolerance FROM the majority rather than about them. In many ways, U.S. politics is supposed to be about the rights of the minority, since majority rights are rarely a problem (they have the power anyway). The problem, IMO, is that one can tolerate what a person does in a very negative way, in a patronizing or pitying way.
If, for example, I said that I tolerate your use of smiley faces, even though I would never do it, that would be a sort of insult, wouldn't it? If, however, I say I respect the fact that you choose to use smiley faces to keep the conversation amiable, this is much less insulting. As far as your ability to add smileys is concerned, nothing is changed, but the way the message is carried out is very different. In one, I have subtly (or not so subtly, actually) asked you to change. In the other, I support you.
BTW, the example was just off the top of my head. I have no feelings about your use of smileys either way, though I lean toward thinking it's a nice way to carry on a debate without creating animosity.
-- posted by RLSharp
This archived discussion is "read only" due to the absence of an active Feature Writer/moderator for this topic.
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.