What the fuck with this:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance>The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper descri

Posting mode: Reply [Return]
Name
Email
Subject	Spoiler Image
Comment
Captcha Tor Only
Flag
File
Embed
Password	(For file deletion.)

File: 1628047524399.png ( 353.67 KB , 480x480 , ClipboardImage.png )

Anonymous 2021-08-04 (Wed) 03:25:24 No.6713

What the fuck with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

>The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.

Am I missing something?

The paradox of intolerance is fucking retarded concept and popper could've figured this out if he just exercised the almonds.

Here's the real deal. There is no "intolerance of intolerence" or other stupid word games, there is only intolerance to injustices. This is a re-branded "muh authoritarianism" bullshit. Either there is justice or you implement it by force. Otherwise you're letting injustice exist.

Every time I hear Popper's name, it's always in some ultra-lib cunty context. How is this pseud taken seriously?

Anonymous 2021-08-04 (Wed) 04:47:49 No.6714

Yes you are missing something and getting pissy over nothing. Popper is essentially saying that to be tolerant you must paradoxically be intolerant of some things, which is paradoxical.

But frankly I don't care about any of this, tolerance is fucking retarded because people have used the word so much they've forgotten what it means and that it isn't all that positive a meaning anyhow. It's a liberal delusion that's a perfect tool for Porky to split the working class with idpol and the inevitable clashing between minority sects.

Anonymous 2021-08-04 (Wed) 06:31:12 No.6717

based popper living rent free in the head of leftoids

Anonymous 2021-08-04 (Wed) 09:13:30 No.6720

Read Marcuse and Cockshott.

Anonymous 2021-08-04 (Wed) 11:25:45 No.6722

>>6714
Yeah, that's my point who cares about tolerance. It's not necessarily desirable. It's a deeply lib concept.

I was getting pissy to generate enthusiasm, ok?

Anonymous 2021-08-04 (Wed) 19:03:13 No.6726

>>6722
>generate enthusiasm
ok you got me lol

Anonymous 2021-08-04 (Wed) 19:04:16 No.6727

>>6717
>in the head of leftoids
His advise was aimed at the repression of /pol/ neonazis actually as well as criticizing liberal protection of Islamic Fundamentalists.

Anonymous 2021-08-04 (Wed) 20:06:46 No.6732

>>6722
But what's the point of the thread? Do you want to whine some more about how liberals care about liberal concepts? That sounds pretty silly.

Anonymous 2021-08-06 (Fri) 21:57:14 No.6759

>>6732
I wanted to start a Popper slander thread heh. Mission failed. I'll try again when I hate him more.

Anonymous 2021-08-07 (Sat) 00:43:59 No.6765

File: 1628297039323.png ( 2.32 MB , 3038x3485 , idpol.png )

When reading picrel, i got curious about the passage:
>It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social
existence that determines their consciousness.

And decided to take a look to see from which of Marx's works it was, and i happened to stumble upon this interesting paper:
https://www.academia.edu/1622097/It_is_not_the_consciousness_of_men_that_determines_their_existence_but_their_social_existence_that_determines_their_consciousness_Marx_Explain_and_discuss_critically_the_claim_that_Marx_holds_a_materialist_theory_of_history

With its apparent objective being:
>In what follows, I argue that commentators such as Gerald A.Cohen (1970), Karl Popper (1962) and Bertrand Russell (1920), have misinterpreted Marx’s conception of history in two important ways.

So i'll be reading it later and will decide what to think of it.

Also, why are there SO MANY FUCKING BOOKS THAT I CAN READ IN MY LIFE DAMMNIT. IT'S DISTRESSING KNOWING I'LL ONLY READ SO FEW IN MY LIFETIME NO MATTER HOW MUCH I TRY.

Unique IPs: 9