Iecietības paradokss

Iecietības paradokss ir loģikas paradokss, ka neierobežoti iecietīga sabiedrība nav pastāvēt spējīga, jo neierobežotu iecietību ar laiku iznīcina neiecietība.^[1] To savā 1945. gada darbā „Atvērtā sabiedrība un tās ienaidnieki” (The Open Society and Its Enemies) pirmoreiz aprakstīja filozofs Kārlis Popers.

Ētikā un politikas filozofijā ir diskusijas par to, cik lielā mērā iecietīgai sabiedrībai vajadzētu būt pret neiecietību. Pats Popers brīdināja pret neiecietīgu uzskatu pārmērīgu apspiešanu un uzskatīja, ka pret neiecietību vajadzētu vērsties tikai tad, ja tā sāk noliegt visus argumentus un aicināt uz vardarbību.^[1]

Atsauces

1 2 Karl Popper. The Open Society and Its Enemies. Ņujorka : Routledge, 2011. 581. lpp. ISBN 978-0-415-47423-5 Jāpārbauda |isbn= vērtība. Skatīts: 2019. gada 24. augustā. Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.

Šis ar filozofiju saistītais raksts ir nepilnīgs. Jūs varat dot savu ieguldījumu Vikipēdijā, papildinot to.

[Popper-1] 1 2 Karl Popper. The Open Society and Its Enemies. Ņujorka : Routledge, 2011. 581. lpp. ISBN 978-0-415-47423-5 Jāpārbauda |isbn= vērtība. Skatīts: 2019. gada 24. augustā. Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.

[1]