There are three types of people, in this world of infinitive difference.
While there is infinite possibility, human limitation is a liability.
The intolerant, the tolerant, and the critical,
three types of minds, psychologically measurable.
The intolerant are solipsistic, and myopic in vision.
Limitation, and certain values are unquestionable.
They do not study other ways of coexistence.
Anybody who is different, may as well be wrong.
The tolerant are apathetic, and have no value.
They have no value other than resignation.
They refuse to understand they will be conquered.
They will be conquered, and subordinated, to the arrogant.
The critical standpoint is a grounding of articulation,
an articulation that takes much work and deliberation.
This deliberation is too much work for everyone.
It is too much work for the average person.
The critical mind evaluates a person, giving the benefit;
they give the benefit of the doubt, until the person in question;
until the person removes that doubt through exhibition and tone.
Until that person makes known, what is their personal intention.
An intolerant person wants to know you are exactly like them.
A tolerant person is apathetic about intolerance, and critique.
The critical person evaluates all the information available,
with the hope the other person is also critical.
While it is true that every person hopes,
Every person hopes to meet with his own kind.
The critical person is the only one,
the only one who can meet with all three minds.
The critical person meets intolerance, with a negation.
When the bar is set by, the irrational person,
at a level of intolerance of certain ideals,
the rights and regulations are set by the intolerant, for the critical.
The critical person has the right, and the duty,
to answer with intolerance, and the duty to not be apathetic.
He has to make the intolerant understand, not to believe in his
but to believe in every other way, except the way he currently lives.
The intolerant has the tendency to see himself against the world.
He sees every other position as one in opposition to his own.
With his heavy hand he cannot understand the difference;
the difference and nuance between all the many living angles.
When the critical person meets the tolerant person,
He questions the apathy inherent in the position.
He questions the ignorance of the apathetic,
and explains that crime of subordination based on delusion.
When the critical, and the critical meet in conversation,
they define their terms and try to meet on rational observable ground.
There is no question that is off limits.
There is no merit with an answer said in force.
The fact is you can mumble your answer under your breath,
if it is fact, it is true, no matter how it is presented.
In fact, an answer that seems truer when said with force,
sees all other possibilities as a challenge to its sort.
Be critical, and analyze the way you live,
try to make yourself better every day.
Do not be afraid to study the lives of other people,
not just to negate, but to affirm and create.