Dear Saurabh
No problem with alternative arguments. Each has merit. It is incorrect to assume the simplistic conclusion you’ve made that “His logic goes: One cannot know if One is right. So, one needs to be tolerant.”
Friedman is NOT a moral relativist.
But look, I suggest you can best understand him and many others (like Hayek, Mill, etc.) if you keep reading. I notice that Ayn Rand “followers” are generally very poorly read, not venturing beyond Ayn Rand. Therefore they tend to make assumptions about others. That’s a gap you may or may not suffer from, but worth reading broadly and not narrowly.
Further, I’m not really interested in debating this since I’m writing a book on this subject (DOF) and tolerance to me is a derivative value. However, because I understand where Friedman is coming from, I’m not fussed about his examples.
S
0 likes