Print

Print


Gunnar,
     Thanks for your explanation. I would submit that it is possible to love everyone, but we may have a different idea of what that means. It is possible to love someone and disagree with them, for instance, or grieve because they do wrong, but still be committed to pursuing the best for them. I heartily agree with you that our focus should be most on "working on our own stone." Thanks for bringing that up.
 
Best wishes,
Will

>>> [log in to unmask] 02/25/04 05:53PM >>>
am 25.02.2004 20:50 Uhr schrieb William Gray  unter [log in to unmask]:

Gunnar,
   I see your point, but why is tolerance a given?Why should tolerance be pursued at all costs? Isn't something like restoration a much better goal? I'd much rather learn to like or to love someone than just learn to stand them. Tolerance is not a compliment to anyone.

Best wishes,
Will

>>> [log in to unmask] 02/25/04 12:56PM >>>
am 25.2.2004 17:41 Uhr schrieb [log in to unmask] unter [log in to unmask]:

I fail to see the meaning of "fundamentalism in a pejorative sense" -- since
fundamentalism is incompatible with tolerance, this sounds like a pleonasm.


Gunnar


Dear Will,

tolerance is definitely NOT a given. Perhaps it is one of the most difficult qualities to attain.

Progress is when one realizes his own act of intolerance and tries not to repeat it (or not too often, as Brecht had pointed it out in "The Good Man of Sechunan").

Since it is impossible to love everybody tolerance should be given to those one cannot. It is not meant to be a compliment.

According to an old Masonic principle one cannot change others, one can only try to change oneself, thereby improving the world within one's own tiny realm.

Work your own stone, in order to fit it in as a cornerstone of the Temple of Humanity.


Cheers,


Gunnar