Are the left wing less tolerant of the views of others?
Discussion
Bill said:
turbobloke said:
If you read the whole paper and I assume you did, how did you miss this?
"Liberalism predicted intolerance of all other right-wing targets"
"Conservatism significantly predicted intolerance of four left-wing targets: pro-gay, pro-choice, church-state separation, and Democratic Party activists."
ALL > FOUR
See also the comment I made earlier about authors' strategic fudge in conclusions.
Well, their research disagrees with some of the previous research but was, as they acknowledge, a small sample. So you'll understand if I take the conclusion of the people who did the actual work."Liberalism predicted intolerance of all other right-wing targets"
"Conservatism significantly predicted intolerance of four left-wing targets: pro-gay, pro-choice, church-state separation, and Democratic Party activists."
ALL > FOUR
See also the comment I made earlier about authors' strategic fudge in conclusions.
If that paper isn't to your liking there's the Pew research and a lot of articles for you to disagree with! In an earlier post I limited it to two links; as you will know if you carry out an online search, there are many more.
Perhaps we can agree that, whatever else, PH should support tolerance in terms of legitimate freedom of expression within the posting rules, and oppose any tactics that denigrate individuals rather than engage their viewpoint via reasoned discussion. If we don't agree, I will still support these principles, they're fundamental to any civilised debate.
Anyone with a political view which they have justified to themselves by whatsoever means will be intolerant of a different political perspective held by others.
In other news....
There are (far) worse situations where homo sap finds itself in than where politicos are permitted to discuss how many angels can be fitted on a pin without resorting to mass-extermination.
In other news....
There are (far) worse situations where homo sap finds itself in than where politicos are permitted to discuss how many angels can be fitted on a pin without resorting to mass-extermination.
Randy Winkman said:
A mate of mine who studied philosophy at uni (waits for groans to subside .....) gave me an answer to this one. If I remember correctly one should be intolerant of intolerance because by doing that we are being supportive of tolerance. Something like that anyway.
The tolerance paradox :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
turbobloke said:
Self-evidently you're always free to take what you want from any evidence. In view of your response to this particular source I would add that people who did some work also arrived at the results posted above, which are clear enough, and that the methodology - sample size included - gave the reported statistically significant results as above.
If that paper isn't to your liking there's the Pew research and a lot of articles for you to disagree with! In an earlier post I limited it to two links; as you will know if you carry out an online search, there are many more.
Perhaps we can agree that, whatever else, PH should support tolerance in terms of legitimate freedom of expression within the posting rules, and oppose any tactics that denigrate individuals rather than engage their viewpoint via reasoned discussion. If we don't agree, I will still support these principles, they're fundamental to any civilised debate.
Brilliant. No doubt you'll grumble that I should do my own research, but as you're making the claim a link would be handy. If it's as good as you say it'll shut me right up.If that paper isn't to your liking there's the Pew research and a lot of articles for you to disagree with! In an earlier post I limited it to two links; as you will know if you carry out an online search, there are many more.
Perhaps we can agree that, whatever else, PH should support tolerance in terms of legitimate freedom of expression within the posting rules, and oppose any tactics that denigrate individuals rather than engage their viewpoint via reasoned discussion. If we don't agree, I will still support these principles, they're fundamental to any civilised debate.
The links to articles you gave earlier were just opinion pieces, no?
And we agree on your final count.
turbobloke said:
XM5ER said:
C S Lewis quote.
A very apt quotation if I may say so.jimmybobby said:
Definitely. I have never met a leftie who can se things from a non lefties perspective.
My brother is a good example. He posted an article from a newspaper about the American elections which was slating Trump and praising Sanders and asked my opinion. I gave it and he promptly went off on one and described me as talking s
t.
I responded that his view was as st as mine and he didnt take kindly to that perspective.
I have a brother who swaps sides between Labour and the LibDems. He doesn't take kindly to any alternative view from anyone. My brother is a good example. He posted an article from a newspaper about the American elections which was slating Trump and praising Sanders and asked my opinion. I gave it and he promptly went off on one and described me as talking s
t.I responded that his view was as s
t as mine and he didnt take kindly to that perspective.These are merely our own family experiences but I find it applies in a wider sense including on PH where aggressive left-wingers appear to be on a mission and when evidenced counter-arguments are presented, resort to mild and unoriginal abuse. Sometimes not so mild but always unoriginal.
Irony and tolerance definitely aren't their strong points.
I have always found depressing for example that gay people get all worked up about being called homos etc and being labelled and to counter this they start shouting bigot/homophobe etc.
Well correct me if I am wrong but both parties calling each other names are as bad as each other. Its utterly moronic.
Its like kids in a playground trying to win an argument.
Beati Dogu said:
Randy Winkman said:
A mate of mine who studied philosophy at uni (waits for groans to subside .....) gave me an answer to this one. If I remember correctly one should be intolerant of intolerance because by doing that we are being supportive of tolerance. Something like that anyway.
The tolerance paradox :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
It goes under the heading of 'rubbing along without p***ing off too many you live with'.
'Living with' needs them to be analysed more carefully.
Democracy appears to be modus opperendi in the UK - and appears to function rather well.
jimmybobby said:
turbobloke said:
XM5ER said:
C S Lewis quote.
A very apt quotation if I may say so.jimmybobby said:
Definitely. I have never met a leftie who can se things from a non lefties perspective.
My brother is a good example. He posted an article from a newspaper about the American elections which was slating Trump and praising Sanders and asked my opinion. I gave it and he promptly went off on one and described me as talking st.
I responded that his view was as st as mine and he didnt take kindly to that perspective.
I have a brother who swaps sides between Labour and the LibDems. He doesn't take kindly to any alternative view from anyone. My brother is a good example. He posted an article from a newspaper about the American elections which was slating Trump and praising Sanders and asked my opinion. I gave it and he promptly went off on one and described me as talking s
t.I responded that his view was as s
t as mine and he didnt take kindly to that perspective.These are merely our own family experiences but I find it applies in a wider sense including on PH where aggressive left-wingers appear to be on a mission and when evidenced counter-arguments are presented, resort to mild and unoriginal abuse. Sometimes not so mild but always unoriginal.
Irony and tolerance definitely aren't their strong points.
I have always found depressing for example that gay people get all worked up about being called homos etc and being labelled and to counter this they start shouting bigot/homophobe etc.
Well correct me if I am wrong but both parties calling each other names are as bad as each other. Its utterly moronic.
Its like kids in a playground trying to win an argument.
Lucas CAV said:
Tsk... those gays -- always wanting their own way...
Wanting their own language - Polari as a cryptolect. From a different era.http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2015/01/polari/
There's no place on PH in 2015 for harassment or worse on LGBTQQI folks, is there?
greygoose said:
Lucas CAV said:
Tsk... those gays -- always wanting their own way...
Indeed, who are they to complain about the labels attached to them?!My point was very simply that like with all views there are two sides and two opposing arguments. Gay people labelling people as homophobic/bigoted etc are just as bad as those calling gay people homo etc. Its stupid and pointless.
People need to be more grown up and see that not everyone shares the same belief systems and consider that they are making idiots of themselves by doing just the same as those they disagree with.
In my earlier post I pointed out I told my brother his viewpoint was as s
t as mine so as to say to him we have differing opinions. It doesnt necessarily make either of us right or give us the leeway to simply dismiss each others views as st.You two? FWIW my post had nothing directly to do with anything previously posted hence O/T but it was inspired by one - from Lucas CAV. For some illogical reason it reminded me of unintelligible conversational pieces between two friends, both gay and an item, at uni and what I later discovered it may have been a version of. Tolerance related, but not Left or Right.
Is it easier for a Rich Man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven than it is for a Camel to
pass through the Eye Of A Needle, or for a Gay Man to serve in The Armed Forces?
Given that UK is secular.
And that H VIII created his own church - C of E - in order to divorce.
Infer what you wish - I imply nothing.
pass through the Eye Of A Needle, or for a Gay Man to serve in The Armed Forces?
Given that UK is secular.
And that H VIII created his own church - C of E - in order to divorce.
Infer what you wish - I imply nothing.
Ali G said:
Is it easier for a Rich Man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven than it is for a Camel to
pass through the Eye Of A Needle, or for a Gay Man to serve in The Armed Forces?
Given that UK is secular.
And that H VIII created his own church - C of E - in order to divorce.
Infer what you wish - I imply nothing.
Er, I think you'll find there is no bar to gays serving in the armed forces, and hasn't been for around 15 years....pass through the Eye Of A Needle, or for a Gay Man to serve in The Armed Forces?
Given that UK is secular.
And that H VIII created his own church - C of E - in order to divorce.
Infer what you wish - I imply nothing.
FF
jimmybobby said:
greygoose said:
Lucas CAV said:
Tsk... those gays -- always wanting their own way...
Indeed, who are they to complain about the labels attached to them?!My point was very simply that like with all views there are two sides and two opposing arguments. Gay people labelling people as homophobic/bigoted etc are just as bad as those calling gay people homo etc. Its stupid and pointless.
People need to be more grown up and see that not everyone shares the same belief systems and consider that they are making idiots of themselves by doing just the same as those they disagree with.
In my earlier post I pointed out I told my brother his viewpoint was as s
t as mine so as to say to him we have differing opinions. It doesnt necessarily make either of us right or give us the leeway to simply dismiss each others views as st.
Lucas CAV said:
? This is somewhat off topic now but.....
You bolded my comment using the whole gay labelling thing which I was using as an example of the way the left react and are unable to see other peoples perspective.Just because someone does not like gay people does not mean gay people should resort to a position of intolerance of their views. Both sides should be willing to accept each others differences as both sides labelling and insulting each other is just stupid.
It is much the same attitude of leftists who are unwilling to accept an opposing view and instead simply create a negative label and get rather uppity which in turn leads right leaning people to be dismissive of them and their views and so the stupid circle goes around.
I'm intolerant of anyone who thinks that the designators "left wing" and "right wing" hold any significant meaning other than for petty tribalism. That said as a pinko, liberal some would say "lefty", commie/anarcho syndicalist I would say I'm pretty tolerant of any views that are expressed without insult, bullying, abuse or intolerance, but if someone's wrong then they're wrong and it's not intolerant to point that out.
s2art said:
People used to say 'hate the sin, not the sinner'. OK, I dont believe in 'sin' but the sentiment is useful. You should be able to dislike homosexuality without disliking a particular practitioner. Is that being homophobic? Perhaps but its a nuanced position.
No, that would be being hypocritical. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff