# The Limits of Authenticity and Solidarity By:: [[Brian Heath]] 2024-02-26 The Paradox of Tolerance roughly states that if a society embraces tolerance as an ideal of freedom, the intolerant will eventually dominate the society and remove the tolerance. Said another way, if one believes in tolerating all differences (e.g., freedom to believe whatever one believes), one must also be tolerant of those who are intolerant. The nature of the intolerant is to put forth actions that eliminate those not like themselves. Thus, the intolerant will systematically work to grow their flock and overwhelm the tolerant. Looking around American society today, one will likely see elements of this paradox playing out. It's a severe problem for the tolerant and tolerant adjacent ideals that only a few philosophers think deeply about. For example, take organizational initiatives related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. One of the critical perspectives of this movement is recognizing differences and biases, which innately require tolerance to things like differences in gender, race, and sexuality to manifest themselves. Ideally, people become more tolerant and adjust their behaviors upon recognizing these. However, one could easily say that these initiatives are not respecting one's religious or personal belief that things like homosexuality is a sin against society, and to be forced into tolerating it is unacceptable. This person could go on to say, are you not acting intolerant of my beliefs and biased against me as a result? Shouldn't you be tolerant of me? Aren't I not a diverse human myself? Shouldn't you treat me equitably as well? Thus, those in charge of such movements must consider what to do, and there is no easy answer to such situations. If one sticks with their tolerance belief, one's objective will be lost. If one places some boundaries on tolerance and freedom, one is branded a hypocrite. For what it's worth, philosophers have proposed various ways out of the situation by examining the problem more closely from a social contract perspective. Essentially, the intolerant are breaking the social contract, so the tolerant are obligated to act against them. However, one will still swirl in circles as to who decides which social norms are correct and why one must agree to the social contract. Ultimately, what and who is right? When one seeks progress through authenticity and solidarity, one will be limited by this paradox. Authenticity, solidarity, and tolerance are not the exclusive answer. They are merely blurry guide posts off in the distance that one can never reach. If one does, the end is near, and one will be very disappointed by how cruel humanity can be. Perhaps one should ask the hippies how things worked out. The answer is never straightforward. #### Related Items [[Tolerance]] [[Paradox]] [[Authenticity]] [[Solidarity]] [[Society]] [[Philosophy]] [[Diversity]]