Philosophy Now Forum

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 6:41 am Well, let's dive into an example of a country and see how all this pans out.

Example, Thailand. Don't talk shit about their king. Besides that, you can happily use "normal" pronouns and limit yourself to "he" and "she".

godelian wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 6:48 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 6:41 am Well, let's dive into an example of a country and see how all this pans out.

Example, Thailand. Don't talk shit about their king. Besides that, you can happily use "normal" pronouns and limit yourself to "he" and "she".

Which includes, for example, not stepping on money. I've lived there so let me add a few things:
expressing anger
public physical affection
pointing feet at people
political discussions - especially even slightly critical - I realize you mentioned this but given that it presents itself as a democracy with free speech, the limits are actually extremely severe.
It presents itself as toleration of other religions - however the Muslim minorities, for example, in the south of Thailand are disciminated against.
It presents itself as tolerant of ethinic minorities, but in practice minority ethinic groups face systematic discrmination. Rohingya, Karen, and Hmong, often face social exclusion, lack of citizenship rights, and limited access to services.
It presents itself as tolerant of LGBTQ people but in fact, they can be both severely discriminated against and tolerated in ways that I find it hard to imagine a conservative Muslim would appreciate. Along with the incredible tolerance of prostitution including child prostitution, that while illegal is often left alone. They have been taking some steps to reduce child prostitution and the corruption and lack of enforcement around it, but it brings a lot of money into Thailand and they have a long way to go.
Thailand presents itself as tolerant of and protective of migrant workers, but in practice, it simple is not and they are systematically exploited - and this isn't a Westerner's evaluation of exploitation but going by how they are supposed to be treated in Thailand in official rules that are systematically no enforced.

But Thailand is an interesting choice of non-western country. It is vastly more tolerant of many things than much of Asia and the MIddle East, for example. It's hardly a representative county, nor would Bali be.

I mean, let's look at the surrounding countries and how Vietnam, Burma, India, Pakistan, singapore, indonesia view Mut'ah. There's no place for it. So, this important tolerance you find in Thailands is not reflected by much of the East. I think there's something false about framing the East as tolerant about the things that matter to you and intolerant of the things that you are intolerant of.

godelian wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 6:48 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 6:41 am Well, let's dive into an example of a country and see how all this pans out.

Example, Thailand. Don't talk shit about their king. Besides that, you can happily use "normal" pronouns and limit yourself to "he" and "she".

..yep..sheboys are just part of society and frequently (with great confusion of middle stumping) very attractive.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2024 1:23 pm
Is toleration the same as acceptance? Is toleration itself practiced through enduring hardship from others who are intolerant? How does one practice tolerance toward intolerance?

And perhaps more importantly, is tolerance viable?

Tolerance is letting go of control. It is the total surrender to what is happening without expecting what is happening to have a different outcome.

Live and let live. And come down hard on those that won't.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2024 1:23 pm

1. : capacity to endure pain or hardship : endurance, fortitude, stamina. 2. a. : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own.

Tolerance was one of the virtues of the European Enlightenment (albeit religious tolerance in most specific cases). After the Enlightenment toleration has been more broadly applied to various non-religious lifestyles and behaviors that are different from one's own. But is tolerance a virtue?

What about intolerant people who are bigoted and prejudiced and perhaps dangerous toward others around them. Are such people as that to be tolerated? And if not, then what? What if they refuse to change their minds and remain intolerant? Should that be tolerated?

Is toleration the same as acceptance? Is toleration itself practiced through enduring hardship from others who are intolerant? How does one practice tolerance toward intolerance?

And perhaps more importantly, is tolerance viable? Or does the first one to eradicate all those s/he does not tolerate become the 'winner take all' in life?

The seed of tolerance is recognition that imperfection is the force guiding folly and adaptations alike. It is an imperfect world and an imperfect cosmos. It is the interplay of various levels of imperfections that determines the present and the future. It is fundamental to the temperament of the individual. Greater peace is found in embracing the reality of all-penetrating imperfection and making the world interesting. Tolerance comes from understanding and compassion, even for the offensive.