Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length


April 08, 2014, 06:27:13 PM
I have no time for tolerance. Beyond, perhaps, not immediately flying into a rage, at the first sign of encroachment.
Encroachment upon my person, my life, my balance.
If I step upon a rusty nail, what do I do?
Do I consider the nail, as equal to me in all respects, and feel compelled to leave it where it lies, to avoid infringing its material-rights?
Well? Do I?

Or do I leave it there for the above reasons, and remind myself to remember to avoid it every time I come near?
But if I do that, am I not being discriminatory? Prejudiced against rusty nails?

Or do I remove the nail, from where it threatens, in order to avoid pain, injury, and tetanus?
Would I - if I took such action - be, in effect, a warmongering, chauvinistic, nail-hating bigot?

It's a real problem.

I favor dealing with it in the same way I deal with everything.
And I encourage you to do the same.

Re: Tolerance.
April 08, 2014, 07:08:21 PM
maybe you can live it here in order to maintain an awareness of the environment. If you know where he is and a potential ennemy doesn't, the nail can help you in your defense. The best thing to do is to consider the pros and the cons of leaving the nail here. if there's more cons, remove it. I think a wiseman can find a use of the most little things. Let's not be too hasty about removing the nail, because when its gone, there will be no turning back. But if you break it, do it without remorse or anger. Do it because it was the best thing do to in that situation.

Sometimes I am more tolerant with the nail than I am tolerant with the human steping on it. The nail is more at it place than a human, more a part of nature. He has virtually no needs at all and take almost no place in this universe. But the human think he can go anywhere and stomp on everything without caring or noticing and if it hurt him, he will try to destroy it before wandering if he is at fault in the first place. It's more easier and respectuous of the nature to simply bypass the nail.
Here the nail became a metaphor of nature and the human is the average blindfolded man.
But if the nail is a whiny leftist, than I agree, remove it.

Re: Tolerance.
April 08, 2014, 07:47:23 PM
Lol ;D
Me I'm gonna love dat way you talk dat English with dat Quebecois ren-der-ring.
Dat was da longest com-ment you 'ave ever made!
Nice to 'ear from a wise-guy.

Re: Tolerance.
April 09, 2014, 04:12:16 PM
In some cases, tolerance is the cowardly reason people avoid being accountable for asserting some difficult judgment against another person. It is the same type of politically correct coward however who will, as if defensively compensating for their cowardice, be the first to assert popular, crowd friendly, socially safe judgments against nonconforming deviants.

Re: Tolerance.
April 09, 2014, 07:46:24 PM
Well. Such people are terminally fucked. We know that.
It would be nice though, if they would just confine their condition to themselves.
It gets so tiresome when we all have to join them.

Re: Tolerance.
April 09, 2014, 10:19:10 PM
It's getting a reputation as residual Puritanism, only secularized around humanism now. I'd go out on a limb and say the same gene(s) that resulted in Puritans during a highly Christian era has via their very offspring gotten us the PC people of our highly liberal era.

Re: Tolerance.
April 10, 2014, 11:35:20 AM
If that is so, then there must have been an awful lot of Puritans.
I understand there were not so very many of them, and so, while a pleasant hypothesis, it may not be very true.
I see, actually, not much wrong with Puritanism. As long as their numbers do not go viral.
They were, though, outcasts, and many formed the basis of the New World, so perhaps there is some truth in your view, after all.
Political Correctness got its start in the New World. It was relatively unknown in Europe for a decade, or so, after its inception. Almost everybody knew, on some level, that it was insane, when it first became visible, which is all the more puzzling when one considers how fast it became the new secular Bible.

I suppose 'secular' is the key, here. The Puritans had the actual Bible, handed down over centuries, and based upon reverence for a transcendent God. Whereas the secular version appeared from nowhere, for no reason, with reverence for nothing but itself.

Re: Tolerance.
April 10, 2014, 02:31:05 PM
It all ties in with communism failing in the East because the West had a better way and part of that is PC. Secular Puritanism today comes with its public shaming rituals. Those doing the shaming climb the ladder because the shamed fall beneath them. It isn't that anything wrongful or even illegal took place. Someone simply broke a social code. There is much resemblance to rooting out witches among us who may have been good people after all and dealing with them most harshly regardless. Anyone can adopt this mode of self promotion. All it takes are loud proclamations of humanist righteousness against any inhumane heretic. Heretics are very hard to spot now so constant vigilance is required. If you really want to advance and there is no legitimate source then fabricate something plausibly heretical about someone and publicly accuse them.

Re: Tolerance.
April 11, 2014, 06:54:45 AM
To remove or not.

What does life really matter?

Nihilistic tendecies has a way of evolving into emo-tendecies.
We do not let society ruin our nail-removal.

By this track I state it