I know about it. I've studied logic and epistemology. Calling it a paradox doesn't stop it from being self-defeating and logically fallacious.
The conundrum refers to the real-life application of that principle and the pragmatic problems arising from it, which are assessed post-factum. As far as deductive formal logic goes, it's contradictory.
But why is tolerance always good to begin with (except towards intolerance)? Why should I choose being tolerant over being intolerant? What makes your position and its dogma (no intolerance allowed) normative and the standard for judging all other worldviews?
I know about it. I've studied logic and epistemology. Calling it a paradox doesn't stop it from being self-defeating and logically fallacious.
The conundrum refers to the real-life application of that principle and the pragmatic problems arising from it, which are assessed post-factum. As far as deductive formal logic goes, it's contradictory.
In our current reality it's how i live and believe. I work as a drug counselor and respect sex orientation and religion, but need to act on bullying
But why is tolerance always good to begin with (except towards intolerance)? Why should I choose being tolerant over being intolerant? What makes your position and its dogma (no intolerance allowed) normative and the standard for judging all other worldviews?