Could a Vulcan be Tolerant?

Reflexive statements are logically complex.  By reflexive we mean a statement or principle that "acts on itself".  If a statement includes itself within its "room to act", it is reflexive.  It has been pointed out by many that Tolerance is a self-contradictory principle simply because it has this character.  As a principle, it requires we be tolerant of everything, i.e. we do not get to choose where it should be applied and where it can be put on the shelf.  Thus, the tolerant individual cannot speak out against intolerance since that would itself be an intolerant act.  But tolerance should not condone what it sets out to be opposed to.  Logically tolerance necessitates that we allow intolerant people the right to be intolerant. This is the paradox that Karl Popper the Austrian-British philosopher spoke of in 1945 in his book The Open Society and Its Enemies when he said; “If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."  As a star trek fan, it seems to me that Vulcans would by definition be incapable of tolerance since it is fundamentally illogical. This is precisely the dilemma the West faces with respect to "Dawa" which is the political agenda of Islam.  (see my previous blog).

But what do we mean when we say the word "Tolerant"? Is it more than an abstract virtue? Most agree that tolerance is a mind set and the practice of "open mindedness". It is patient, lenient, accepting, even forgiving.  It does not mean agreeing, or giving up one’s own views or convictions. Being tolerant is not easy.  It allows us the ability to suffer fools, if not gladly, with a certain patience that looks beyond the moment.  Are there any limits to tolerance?  I would argue that there must be. One cannot be tolerant of evil.  It is illogical in my opinion for example that the LGBTIQ community in its communal acceptance of unlimited immigration for Syrian refugees fails to understand Dawa and that the goal of political Islam is to impose Sharia on the entire world.  They fail to understand that unreformed Islam or radical Islam if you prefer is inherently intolerant of their sexual orientation and not only preaches but practices the death penalty for those living that lifestyle. Is it logical to accept with open arms those who seek to kill you?  I do not know what the solution might look like, but if we allow the spread of intolerance, those of us who cherish tolerance as a virtue, as the "only real test of civilization" are likely to die out, one way or another.