Comment on [deleted]

einkorn@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• الله@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  There are no universally agreed legal definitions of “intolerance” or “hate speech”.

  source

  • einkorn@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    If you require a universally agreed upon legal definition of what is right or wrong you might do well reading some books on philosophy. Or pickup a random religious text and live by it if that’s what you prefer.

    source

    • الله@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      There is no universally agreed-upon legal definition of “right” or “wrong.”

      source

      • einkorn@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        That’s exactly my point and the reason I think your reliance on a “universally agreed legal definition” is useless.

        source
• الله@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  also

  Popper did not advocate for pre-emptive censorship or deplatforming of fringe ideas themselves.

  The paradox applies specifically to ideologies that seek to disallow debate entirely and dismantle open, democratic institutions.

  not all “bigots” are against debate or debate

  source

  • einkorn@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    As per the Oxford learners dictionary a bigot is per definition someone unwilling to debate.

    source

    • الله@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      but according to guardian, “Bigotry” is really just a name for any opinion with which you happen to disagree.

      source

      • einkorn@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Going by your name I assume English is not your first language.

        [A bigot is someone] who will not listen to or accept the opinions of anyone who disagrees

        To have a debate both parties have to listen to each other. They exchange arguments in favor of their point of view and in the best case one side convinces the other of their own point of view. That is not possible with someone unwilling to listen to or accept options of other people.

        source
      • SanderZeldenthuis@nord.pub ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        but according to guardian, “Bigotry” is really just a name for any opinion with which you happen to disagree.

        Wow you totally misrepresented that link.

        1. The linked article isn’t even about the meaning of the word bigot, its a debate between two people about whether a politician should use the word bigot.

        2. One of the debaters asserts that “Bigotry is really just a name for any opinion with which you happen to disagree.” which is his personal opinion, not a statement by The Guardian.

        3. The assertion is never supported, contradicts the dictionary, and isn’t shared by the other debater in the article.

        source