Scott Alexander, in his celebrated post I Can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup, identified tolerance as “respect and kindness toward members of an outgroup.” I think this is a good sentimental definition, but somewhat limited in the breadth of analysis it permits.
Consider an open source project. Tolerance means "We don't care about your politics, your demographics, or your ethics [except insofar as these touch on your work]. The work matters, we DGAF about anything else." Tolerance implies your membership and position will not depend on these irrelevant matters.
Those things may become very relevant to the same people in a different context. You might work unhesitatingly with someone on a project that you would not marry, sit at a dinner table with, loan a power tool to, etc.
We deduce that tolerance in this sense requires the skill of compartmentalization: being able to separate your attitude toward someone's characteristics in one part of life from your attitude for other parts of life.
I think openness to evangelism is also partially predicated on whether the evangelizing heterogroup has something to offer. Probably more common historically, but the promise of eternal salvation used to work a lot more than your theory would suggest.
My brother hangs out with a lot of folks in Meghalaya in Eastern India. Most Khasis are Christian of some denomination or other, having converted fairly recently (Mid-20th Century.) He said that he got the impression that they were genuinely relieved to have given up their headhunting and (some of) their animism. I assume that when large groups of people convert there is a crazy mix of true faith, realism and cynicism.
I had more to say but got bored. Figure it out I'm gonna go lift
hi eigen this was an interesting read :)
Tolerance is contextual.
Consider an open source project. Tolerance means "We don't care about your politics, your demographics, or your ethics [except insofar as these touch on your work]. The work matters, we DGAF about anything else." Tolerance implies your membership and position will not depend on these irrelevant matters.
Those things may become very relevant to the same people in a different context. You might work unhesitatingly with someone on a project that you would not marry, sit at a dinner table with, loan a power tool to, etc.
We deduce that tolerance in this sense requires the skill of compartmentalization: being able to separate your attitude toward someone's characteristics in one part of life from your attitude for other parts of life.
Welcome back, Eigen! The post makes enough sense as is.
I think openness to evangelism is also partially predicated on whether the evangelizing heterogroup has something to offer. Probably more common historically, but the promise of eternal salvation used to work a lot more than your theory would suggest.
yeah that's correct. i was trying to remember why on earth it was ever permitted but this checks out
note that i think alot of the time it was more like "maybe we can get some technology out of this" or "maybe they won't kill us if we convert"
My brother hangs out with a lot of folks in Meghalaya in Eastern India. Most Khasis are Christian of some denomination or other, having converted fairly recently (Mid-20th Century.) He said that he got the impression that they were genuinely relieved to have given up their headhunting and (some of) their animism. I assume that when large groups of people convert there is a crazy mix of true faith, realism and cynicism.