toleration & hate final

tolerant tolerationists

• admit possible validity of alternative beliefs

• oppose punitive sanctions

intolerant antitolerationists

• dogmatic certainty in own belief

• supports punitive sanctions for disliked beliefs

tolerant antitolerationists

• admit possible validity of alternative beliefs

• support punitive sanctions

intolerant tolerationists

• dogmatic certainty in own belief

• opposes punitive sanctions

Donatists

rejected church “traitors” unwilling to give up church under threat

medieval tolerantia

• forbearance of bad people (immoral, infidel, etc) by those in power

  • true tolerance only when you believe they’re evil

  • purpose of tolerating some evils: prevent greater evils

vinculum societatis

chain / bond of society

concordia

harmony of heart and mind

what broke both vinculum and concordia and led to development of free speech arguments

1517 Protestant Reformation

2 Protestant ideas relevant for development of free speech arguments

• sola scriptura: authority of truth is the Bible, not the church

• sola fide: justification obtained by faith, with no role for the church

how did vinculum change after the Protestant Reformation?

• tolerantia expanded to heretics

• forced civility; offensive and religious speech limited

where did Roger Williams conduct his “livelie experiment”

Providence (which later became Rhode Island)

Williams’ “civil peace”

• has nothing to do with your morals

• concerns bodies and goods

• low standard

Williams’ “religious peace”

• true salvation and worship pleasing to god

• extremely high standard (Williams believed he was the only one to achieve it)

difference between civil and religious peace

• there is a difference between being a good citizen and being right before god

• different authorities

Williams’ “civility”

• mere civility (unmixed with opinions or beliefs)

  • eg. wearing clothes and adopting customs

• goal: more speech

how did Quakers clash with Williams

refused to abide by customs

• believed they made people look unequal before god

Williams’ problem with Quakers

• customs don’t need to signify any deeper truth

• they signify a superficial respect

what question is asked in Milton’s Areopagitica?

how does a state best create virtuous citizens?

Milton’s view on licensing

• it’s ineffective

• books aren’t the only reason people are corrupted

  • would have to regulate “all pastimes delightful to man”

who is included under Locke’s justified intolerance

• atheists

• antitolerationists

• religions that undermine rules necessary to civil society

• religions that in service of “another prince” (Catholics)

why is it irrational to delegate truth to the state (according to Locke)

• “princes” divided about religious questions

  • probability that you come to believe the true religion is low

• allowing princes to enforce religion would mean that people owe their eternal fate to the places of their nativity

why is the state unlikely to be a good epistemic arbiter

• not motivated by truth/dignity

• hate speech codes are vague and overbroad

• application of codes are likely to be partial against disliked groups

traditional arguments against atheists

if you don’t believe in an omniscient god that rewards virtue and punishes vice, you will follow your own desires and be a terror to society

is there a connection between beliefs and actions (shown in evidence)

no

• man almost never acts in accordance with his principles

  • the religious obey themselves as god

• people of different religions and atheists around the world behave the same overall

Bayle’s beliefs about state persecution of beliefs

irrational for state to persecute beliefs for civil peace

• instead need cultural effects and political institutions

what would a society of atheists look like according to Bayle

any other society

why does David Hume say about toleration

it’s unnatural but overall beneficial

• we need it for general rules

Hume’s “motivational myopia”

we are short-sighted

• we choose present frivolous temptations over important distant interests

Hume’s “partiality”

needs and desires of those close to us affect our own more than strangers

• tribal morality

what leads to conflict between groups, according to Hume

• myopic passions

  • limited generosity

• moderate scarcity of resources and instability of possession

2 fates of justice, according to Hume

• devolves into tribal conflict

• demands perfect knowledge and impartiality (no such human exists)

how do general rules of justice become effective according to Hume

they become conventions, habits, and customs

• long term utility of justice produced by collective behavior, not by individual action (arches vs walls)

examples of tribal passions in current news (mentioned in lecture)

Trump attempting to remove due process when deporting immigrants

• “I break down every law in the country to get at the devil”

• he is playing god, yet no such person exists

superstition form of religious fanaticism

credulous religious feeling that believes in unknowable and infinite powers

enthusiasm form of religious fanaticism

credulous religious feeling that assumes god is speaking directly to you

• VERY American

• politically dangerous - “I am my own authority”

Mill’s harm pr