In our world today, there is such an array of different people, different believes, different values and morals and religions. There are many ways of thinking and many different ways that people choose to live thier lives. It would be almost impossible not to be Tolerant, and it might also be miserable not to be tolerant. Today we have many ways of communicating with each other, being able to tolerate other individuals ways of thinking is how we connect with people. It is having this amazing virtue that we can open our minds and hearts to others that our different from us and really learn and be interested about what they believe. Especially now with the internet, where people can share so much about themselves and what they believe, I think it is very important to be able to be tolerant. It makes for such a more loving and understanding world.

Views: 1

Comment by Molly Goodman on September 27, 2009 at 9:29am
Laili- I agree with your post 100%. It is important for us all to be tolerant and accept other views and ideas. Do you think it is dangerous that our world is so networked? Do you think sometimes that could cause us more harm than good because we are able to constantly access all sorts of information? Why or why not?

I think the networked world is a huge advantage because it allows us to access information at the click of a button. But sometimes I think it can be dangerous. People can get their hands on information that might be better kept confidential. What do you think?
Comment by James S Saint on September 27, 2009 at 10:14am
I also agree. And I also agree to the dangers.

It all proposes a conundrum.

If you allow for total access to any and all information, whether accurate or not, what are the real consequences?

When a girl (for example) wants to know more about a guy that she hasn't really even met, what is she likely to do if allowed to access all personal information about that guy?

I can tell you from experience that she will first look for any signs of "bad" and upon seeing those mere signs, she will presume and not seek out the possible good that might outweigh the bad. Even further, she is very unlikely to realize just how misleading the "factoids" concerning the guy really are.

The human mind is very limited. Any person can only take the time to process a limited amount of information and the mind already knows this without having to think about it.

So in that situation, people, all people, attempt to simplify the "facts" and record only the "relevant facts". Which are considered to be the most relevant? - Those that indicate possible harm of course.

So where does that leave you? The most recorded and simplified "truth" is a list of negative "facts". Those facts, then persuade you to not bothering to get to know the actual guy and the actual truth of him. Why risk it?

It is actually a type of lust that compels a person to presume whether they favor the guy or not. But it blinds the mind to real truth.

So when allowed total access to ALL information, we are still blinded by the fact that we cannot process ALL information and usually wouldn't even if we could. Making your eyes bigger does NOT lead to being more aware of real truth.

The aptmt manager who has access to criminal records, forbids a person living space because she prefers only people who have a "clean record". She takes the time to look up any "bad" and condemns based on that information alone. Does anyone even record the "good" for her to investigate?

But then to do otherwise would be taking a risk. It takes courage to seek out the real truth. This is largely why men have been allocated the responsibility of judging in the past. It never really had anything to do with mere tradition or belief that men were smarter. It had to do with the courage to take the risks required to face danger in order to verify that it actually is real.

More information does NOT lead to more truth, and often does not lead to greater tolerance, but actually less.

The news media takes advantage of this situation by presenting, in their limited time, the portion of the truth they prefer that you make your judgments from. They tell you loudly of the BAD conservative Republican, but don't have the time to speak much of the bad liberal Democrat. They have a very exact reason for doing this and they do it continually. They know the end result.

So in the long run, it isn't a matter of merely access to more. It is an issue of the quality, accuracy, and balance.

There are more opportunities for deception than there are for balanced and accurate truth. So guess what happens when you are given more opportunity? - more deception, not more truth. More fear and intolerance, not more love and tolerance.

But there is purpose in even this. Everything has consequences.

Nietzsche, the gypsies, and the Jews all discovered the consequences of stirring chaos and doubt. "From chaos and doubt, rises order and belief." - Nazism (German for National Socialism).

Thus we are provided with a formula tested in reality;

Create chaos and doubt with too much information ==> establish National socialism with intolerance to doubt.

This formula in action is what you see going on around you this very moment;

"Doubt religions that advertise peace"
"Have faith in Secular scientists and government protections"

This was once called a "Pharaoh", "priest-king" in charge of both military and belief (psychologically controlled belief) and also known as "Nazism" - total intolerance of non-compliance and any hint of speaking against the order.

It is the new fad of governments throughout the world. America is just taking longer to profess what it has had to hide for the past 50 years.

So how can you get the good out of the Internet?

You have to want to find the possibility of good more than you want to find the probability of bad. And you have to have the courage to allow for it. Else the more information you gain, the more intolerance becomes the reality.
Comment by PH214 Lori T. on September 27, 2009 at 9:33pm
James,

I agree with you that sometimes information is limited. If you're looking for the bad, you will find it. If you're looking for the good, you will be hard pressed to find it. I am a Christian through and through. I am a subjective believer and don't seek information to prove what I believe. I was nervous to join this site because I am not very knowledgeable in the Bible and therefore fear getting backed in to a corner.

Anyway, you touched on the media. I agree with you that the media will report only the things they want you to hear. I did a paper on the Sheppard trial. Dr. Sheppard's wife was killed while he was home and he was just hit on the head. There was more to it, obviously, but the media decided to report only what "could have happened" because it was more appealing than his innocence. He was convicted in his first trial because of the unbelievable press coverage from the very start. While we complain that celebrities will only get a slap on the wrist, we also have to see the other side of the coin - and that is the media circus. Look at the media circus that swarmed OJ. Again, the media decided what we should hear and what was more interesting.

So, in this networked age, you have to take everything you read with a grain of salt. You can't even trust Wikipedia anymore because anyone can add whatever they want - factual or not. I think sometimes the ease of having the information at your fingertips is a drawback. You have to be cautious and question what you read. You also have to take the information in and chew on it for a while. People with strong convictions (and sometimes those who enjoy the debate) will jump in with intolerance just to "get to you." Intolerance is everywhere.

Anyway, that's my point of view!
Comment by Jeff H on September 28, 2009 at 12:54am
Don't be nervous. I'm a Christian and find that the scripture answers every question I've had posted to me. This is a great place to work on the "Be ready always to give an answer for the hope that is within you" part of being a Christian.

With regard to media, just consider the airplay given the killer of the abortionist, Tiller (Obama even commented) and the killing of the anti-abortionist, Jim Pouillon. Hardly a hic-up. If you want to talk about intolerance, also consider the secondary application. Tolerance of intolerance against one's opposition.

Our citizenship lies elsewhere. We can be expected to be treated as different, and foreigners. Its kind of a badge of honor.

An eloquent and open summary.Well done.

Grace in Christ to you and yours.
Comment by PH214 Lori T. on October 1, 2009 at 11:51am
Jeff,

Thank you for the compliment. I think the media can be short sided and insight fear in the hearts of many. I think we're too quick to believe what is put in front of us and that creates a lot of intolerance. Ignorance can sometimes lead to intolerance.

It's funny because I will go to my son for help with the Bible. I put him in Christian schools for 7 years until we couldn't afford it any more. He's very passionate and very knowledgeable. I'm very proud of him.

In our studies we are moving on to "why is there evil in the world?" This really has my attention. I'm very stressed about it!!

Comment

You need to be a member of The Open Source Religion Social Network to add comments!

Join The Open Source Religion Social Network

Latest Activity

Kernel John posted a video

Martin Hanczyc: The line between life and not-life

http://www.ted.com In his lab, Martin Hanczyc makes "protocells," experimental blobs of chemicals that behave like living cells. His work demonstrates how li...
Apr 15
Kernel John replied to Kernel John's discussion Science and the Soul
"This vid discusses Libet's experiment in somewhat scientific terms. "
Mar 30
Kernel John posted a video

Michio Kaku on the Evolution of Intelligence

Don't miss new Big Think videos!  Subscribe by clicking here: http://goo.gl/CPTsV5 Dr. Michio Kaku returns to Big Think studios to discuss his latest book, T...
Mar 30
Anisha Boxman replied to Anisha Boxman's discussion Language
"iu"
Mar 22
Alexander posted a status
"Please join my new group http://j.mp/PXhUTL"
Mar 21
Kernel John replied to Anisha Boxman's discussion Language
"History of the World in 18 Minutes"
Mar 16
Alexander left a comment for Michael King
"How true"
Mar 15
Michael King left a comment for Alexander
"To say everything is truth, is to say everything is the same thing and if that's the case, it…"
Mar 15
Michael King left a comment for Kernel John
"John of the Salvis tribe, Thank you for your greeting, I am doing well thank you for asking, I…"
Mar 15
Alexander left a comment for Michael King
"I AM Truth so r u all the bs in the world is your truth as you believe or choose not to. It's…"
Mar 15
Michael King left a comment for Alexander
"You say "we" are the truth? If that were the case, would belief be extinct because the we…"
Mar 15
Anisha Boxman replied to Anisha Boxman's discussion Language
"Within any system self-reinforcing feedback loops bring into existence emergent properties."
Mar 15

© 2014   Created by Sidian M.S. Jones.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service