|
I am against the word "tolerance"
|
|
merriam webster definition: to endure or resist the action of (as a drug or food) without serious side effects or discomfort Ever since I attended an assembly for school about tolerance, I have not understood why we use the term tolerance. The problem I have with it, is that there is no reason for people to tolerate people who are a diffrent race or orientation than themselves, because they shouldn't have a problem with it. The main thing that I associate with tolerance, is pain, and I found it odd that people were responding to the mere existence of homosexuals or african americans the same way the do as pain. Neither of my parents ever taught or showed me any prejudice towrds others, thus I grew up seeing everyone as equal, so it truly perplexes me as to why people can be like that. does anyone else feel this way? or feel the need to be tolerant because they really cannot stand a certain type of people? note: I am not saying that people who use the word tolerance are prejudice, I am merely advocating against its political correctness. Also im sorry for starting off with the definition of something, I know its terribly corny. |
|
Re: I am against the word "tolerance"
Link |
by
on 2008-11-16 10:08:56 |
|
Interesting point, stunt, I feel the same way as you do. What we both have to accept is that some people do have painful prejudice against people who are different. For example, there are people who will cringe and feel pain when they see Obama or a gay couple on TV. The important point of tolerance is that this is their problem, and they better not make it mine or anyone else's. I think that a better description than "tolerant" of you and I is "healthy minded" or perhaps "evolved" (not in the Darwinian sense, but in the sense that ours is a progressive perspective). 
|
|
Re: I am against the word "tolerance"
Link |
by
on 2008-11-16 17:20:52 (edited 2008-11-16 17:23:09)
|
contrarily to stunt and and gendou's position, i find the use of 'tolerance', considering its implications to be wholly appropriate. The point is to ask for the minimum acceptable behavior, sort of saying "we know you have some illogical dislike of x group of people, but we'd appreciate it if you would just tolerate their existence, unpalatable as you may find it, for the good of society." Whereas asking whole-hearted acceptance of differing viewpoints by everyone is unreasonable, and unacceptable in my opinion, you cannot just go around telling people what to think (especially in such a socio-cultural realm). "Healthy minded" gendou? I disagree, if we characterize pan-human acceptance as being a qualification of healthy mindedness, we would be condemning the vast majority of mankind throughout history of being unhealthy in mind, and really mental health can really only be defined within the bounds of what is normative in the sociological microcosms of history which whatever people exist in. The self-characterization as 'progressive' i would agree with though, 'evolved' just carries Darwinian connotations innately in contemporary English.  |
|
Re: I am against the word "tolerance"
Link |
by
on 2008-11-16 18:50:47 (edited 2008-11-16 18:55:56)
|
|
Hey, I can define health any way I want! Before the invention of the tooth brush, people had really unhealthy teeth. Just because everyone had rotten decayed teeth back then, doesn't mean it was healthy. If you accept my substitution of dental health for mental health, then this counter-example disproves your theory that health can really only be defined within the bounds of what is normative in the ... microcosms of history. Clearly, I am not a social relativist. Deal with it. I call racism a disease. A mental disorder. I don't ask for "whole-hearted acceptance" from anyone, I know that would be a poor use of my time. But I do call people who don't whole-heartedly accept other races sick with the disease of racism. And please, a racist who lived 1,000 years ago is still a bloody racist! Anyway, I think stunt's point is that, because he and I are not resisting anything, that the word tolerance doesn't apply, because the word implies some inner struggle which we both do not experience. Are you accusing us of being racists in our heart by simply refusing to show it? If so, then you can call us tolerant. If, on the other hand, you believe that he and I both have no such cruelty in any fiber of our being, you can kindly refer to us as "healthy minded", "progressive", "open minded", "xenophilic", or, "nice guys". We are not tolerant. We are more than that. That's his point. I like it.
|
|
Re: I am against the word "tolerance"
Link |
by
on 2008-11-16 22:48:33 (edited 2008-11-16 22:55:40)
|
|
A mental disorder? I suppose that is a justifiable position, in many cases i am certain you can demonstrate racism as a specific phobia, therefore qualifying as a mental disorder under the DSM-IV, though in past conditions where it was a socially normative and expected i'm not sure you could call it so, by definition of a mental disorder, however you not being a social relativist (or fan of standards set by psychologists-you can't just go around naming things disorders arbitrarily...though you may not have been) feel free to disagree with me on that point. If we do define it as a mental disorder, it certainly seems appropriate that programs such as that Stunt mentioned having attending stress tolerance (he said he didn't get why they do, or he thinks they shouldn't, i am saying why they do/should is all), since somewhat open-minded on the issue there really is no need to tell you anything, they only need to address those who do display this mental disorder and encourage them not to act on their feelings.Hence, tolerance is the catchword. I do see your lexicological displeasure at tolerance being used to describe even more open-minded people though. As to whether or not you are "healthy minded", can't say, have not the qualifications or the ability to psychoanalyze you. But you are both certainly more progressive on this particular issue than racists are without a doubt, on other issues, i am less sure of your open-mindedness gendou, but i really would have to quiz your thoughts on a wide variety of issues to determine that and it is beyond the scope of this thread. |
|
Re: I am against the word "tolerance"
|
it would be a smart move to use a lower level of vocabulary in order to convey your thoughts more effectively so that others may understand. 
wooo maplestory |
|
Re: I am against the word "tolerance"
Link |
by
on 2008-11-17 01:31:57 (edited 2008-11-17 01:37:21)
|
|
I can too go around naming things disorders arbitrarily. I'm speaking for myself and not for all psychologists. I don't pretend to know anything about psychology beyond what a laymen would be expected to know. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has nothing to do with this argument -- off topic. You use too many comas, which makes your sentences really hard to read. Try shorter sentences. They're great. (I have no idea what you're trying to say in paragraph/sentence #2...) You're questioning my open-mindedness? Really? What's in it for you? Rocketg, how about you stop trying to derail this thread? There's something interesting to talk about, which is the semantic implications of a word which has been slightly misappropriated. That has nothing to do with my open-mindedness, the DSM-IV, psychoanalysis, or any of that garbage. Maybe as a psychology student, you're approaching every problem with the same hammer. Watch out for that. It's important that scientists, especially ones who study "higher level" realms (like biology and psychology) use the right tools to attack a problem, rather than the most familiar tools. My point is that I agree with Stunt that the use of the word "tolerance" is an insult to those of us who aren't tolerating anything. Quite the contrary, I find myself often enjoying diversity.
|
|
Re: I am against the word "tolerance"
Link |
by
on 2008-11-17 02:09:44 |
|
wow never thought of it. but I do used word tolerance a lot to describe why certain culture clash with others.. and that answered is in general that they are not tolerate one another... but seeing the way that stunt describe tolerant. I may have to think again about tolerance.... to me there is two definition of tolerance the pain stuff as stunt said and the one that I already know for so long.. 'the above statement about culture clash' well if I think logically then yes.. that the word may seem to be wrong.. but isn't some word deteriorating from the original purpose... like... well I can't thing of any of english word... let me try... cool as it cold and the other as awesome 'cool dude' or something more similar but the meaning have been deteriorate... 
 |