Is intolerance the path to loneliness?

I was talking with my Dad about disputes in society and I have also spoken to Phil about it at some point, and I suddenly realised that I couldn't call Hitler wrong, unless, like Phil, I accept that there is an absolute truth and that good is not relative, but written into the very fabric of our being.

Alright, so I can call Hitler wrong, but only by my own beliefs. If I accept that killing people is bad, then I accept that Hitler was wrong to kill people (directly or indirectly). But to accept that killing people is wrong, one must appreciate that life is sacred and that it is indeed a sin to kill (Need I remind us of 'Thou shalt not kill'?). So by believing I am right, and that it is wrong to kill, I am to disagree with anyone who should think or do otherwise. I must be intolerant of anything that contradicts my belief.

So to have absolute confidence in your beliefs is to say that you are right and anyone with a view to the contrary is wrong. First point: Do you agree with that statement?

Thus assuming Hitler acted in the way that he thought was right, we can only say that he was wrong based on our difference in belief. Now right about here, some people might say, "Ahhh yes, but I am assuming the position that MY beliefs are right. Therefore Hitler was wrong, and that is indisputable". Fair enough. So lets do a little role reversal. Assume the role of Hitler, but do not assume his actions. You have acted in a way that has angered many people. To them you are a monster and you have done an evil thing. Because it is now you in that position, is it now right? In your eyes, yes. But in everyone else's eyes, no.

Now consider this: Is it possible to be identical in every opinion on every matter with another person? I'm going to assume that it is very unlikely. You would have to be born at exactly the same time, to the same family and experience the same things (that's where identical twins fails as a representation - that and one is usually left-handed and the other right-handed). So lets assume it is totally impossible to have identical opinions on every matter in your lifetime with someone else. Your view of right is unique. Second point: Do you agree with that statement?

If you are to assume that your view is the right one, and that everyone else's is wrong, and that your view is unique in all the world, then you are stating that before you, there was no one with the right view. That is not to say that there wasn't any 'right' because some views overlap. Curiously, that means that Jesus couldn't have the right opinion because his views might not have been the same. I can't pretend to have any evidence proving that your views are different, but if we keep to the assumption that your view is unique, then Jesus Christ had it wrong. So that is blasphemy. Third point: Do you think that's an extremely brash remark and if so, why so (do remember that it is based on an assumption)?

Let us now try to picture ourselves in the position of an intolerant person, who doesn't disagree with killing. The person assumes the stance that they are right and thus act accordingly, aiming to prevent anyone acting against their views. Assuming they act on what they think is right, they are right in their eyes. If they show absolute intolerance for anyone against them, they kill them. Let us assume that is a constant; disagree and die.

If their view is unique in all the world, then everyone will disagree with them on some matter, thus everyone, but them, will die. As such, that leaves them alone in the world. Everything they then do, assuming they do what they believe is right, is right. There is no evil in the world, according to their views. Fourth point: Is that the case assuming they act on what they think is right always?

This need not be as extreme as killing others, but if you ignore people who disagree, or show any negative emotions/actions to someone who disagrees, then are you not in effect always disagreeing with everyone on something? Now you think about it, it's obvious. Of course we disagree with others on something at some point. But let us refer to the title. Is intolerance the path to loneliness?

We must understand that our views are unique and will differ in some respects with others. We must not allow one difference to overshadow every other view that we share in common, for if we show absolute intolerance to any difference, then we are to confine ourselves to ourselves and thus be alone. If you believe being alone is right, then there's nothing stopping you being intolerant. But for what I'd like to think is most of us, absolute intolerance would result in an undesirable isolation.

Thus to a degree, we must tolerate difference if we wish to avoid being alone. You can find agreement in everything you say by combining all of the beliefs of your neighbours (not in the next door sense). Unless you are the proud owner of a completely unique belief, you will find someone who agrees with you in some way. Thus, you avoid loneliness by finding companionship in your fellow man (sounds very nice and kind of cool, but on a serious note, there's a lot of truth behind that). Fifth point: Do you agree with such a conclusion?

I believe there may be an argument that can show that absolute tolerance is a bad way to go too. I'd like to see someone else try and write about it :D