I would like to be very intolerant of intolerance
I'm not sure that I understand you. I think that intolerance is sometimes the right thing as a response, and in those case I would be tolerant of the intolerance.
When is intolerance the rational and moral response? Well, certainly not when it is a matter simply of mere differences of opinion, culture, taste, etc. But what about behavior which is immoral and harmful. Should we be tolerant of the rapist that brutalises our sister? Should we be tolerant of people that intend mass murder? Should the world have been less tolerant of Hitler's immoral activities right from the beginning? Would this have lessened the amount of evil and increased the amount of good in the world?
It seems to me, that it can be rational (and morally obligatory) to be tolerant of intolerance, when that intolerance is itself a a rational and moral activity directed against immoral and hurtful behavior. To be tolerant of intolerance in such a case would mean being supportive of moral efforts directed at preventing evil and encouraging good. There are some things that I simply will not tolerate. And I would hope that good people would support me in those stances when they are considered rational and moral, as I would do for them. Otherwise, to be intolerant against every rational and moral stance would be to negate the distinction between good and evil, moral and immoral, harmless and harmful, etc. Personally, I don't think it would be a good idea to negate those distinctions... |
