necessity of tolerance essay

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Student Essays

Essays-Paragraphs-Speeches

Essay on Tolerance | Meaning, Purpose & Importance in Life

Leave a Comment

Tolerance is not about everyone agreeing with you, tolerating others even if they don’t agree. Tolerance is understanding that while two people may disagree they are both entitled to their own opinion. Read the following well written essay on tolerance, meaning, purpose & importance of having tolerance in life, its uses and ways to develop tolerance for children & students.

List of Topics

Essay on Tolerance | Meaning, Purpose & Importance of having Tolerance in Life

Tolerance is the ability to accept the fact that there are things in life you cannot change. It is the ability to shrug the shoulders and keep moving forward. It’s about who you are, not what you want others to be or to do. Tolerance is giving everyone the same chance you would give yourself. You can think for yourself and have your own opinion, but you must allow others to do the same.

Importance of Tolerance in Life

Tolerance in education is about acceptance and understanding. Education will be enjoyable if you accept and understand that not everyone thinks and sees things in the same way as you. Education is not about learning to agree with others, it’s understanding that everyone has their own opinions and ways of thinking.

>>>>>> Related Post:     Essay on Ethics, Role & Importance in Life

The tolerance is not about being right or wrong, it’s about being able to understand different points of view. It is not about being a doormat, it’s about being able to listen and understand without allowing someone else to walk all over you.

Benefits of Tolerance

Tolerance is freedom of expression. It’s the freedom to be who you are without fear or judgement. It will allow you to take part in social activities without feeling like you are not good enough or that you don’t fit in. Tolerance will give you the understanding to know how to accept another’s choice and make your own informed decision.

Tolerance will give you the ability to show empathy for others and understand that not everything is black and white. Tolerance will give you understanding that there are reasons for things to happen, it will teach you patience. Tolerance is not about being right or wrong, it’s about being open minded and understanding other people have a different point of view.

Tolerance will let you realize that your life is full so you don’t have time to be cruel or unkind. Tolerance will give you the ability to let go of anger and live life to the full.

Tolerance is not about giving up on people, it’s understanding that you can’t change them but you can change how you react to them. Tolerance will give you the ability to make your own mind up about people without pressure from others.

Developing tolerance in Life

Tolerance in life isn’t something that is developed overnight. It takes a lifetime to learn how to practice tolerance in your daily life. Remember, tolerance is understanding and having an open mind, it is staying away from judgements and opinions.

The first step to tolerance is knowing that you can’t change how other people think and understand that you can’t force someone to be who you want them to be.

The second step is understanding that people will say and do things that you may not agree with, but it’s what they think is right. It’s a different point of view from your own. Remember, everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions.

The third step is realizing that people will say things to get a reaction from you. It’s not about what they say it is about how you receive it and use your tolerance to either react or move forward. This can be a useful step toward self-development and growth and it will also give you the opportunity to practice your tolerance skills.

Tolerance will give you the ability to help others, it will give you courage and strength. Tolerance is about being able to have patience with people and understanding that even if you don’t agree with someone that does not mean you can not like them.

Tolerance will give your life purpose, it will give you the opportunity to teach, a skill of a lifetime. Tolerance is about being able to see people for who they are and accepting them for who they are.

Short Essay on Tolerance:

Tolerance is the ability to accept and respect different beliefs, opinions, customs, and cultures. In today’s world where diversity is everywhere, it is essential for people to be tolerant towards others. Tolerance promotes unity, peace, and harmony among individuals and communities.

Being tolerant means being open-minded and willing to learn from others. It also means being patient with those who have different views and understanding that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. Tolerance helps us to see things from different perspectives and broadens our horizons.

Unfortunately, in recent times, we have seen a rise in intolerance towards minority groups, immigrants, and people with differing beliefs. This leads to discrimination, hate crimes, and even violence. As responsible citizens of the world, we must actively promote tolerance and speak out against any form of intolerance.

Tolerance is not about agreeing with others or compromising our own beliefs. It is about respecting the rights and freedoms of others, even if we don’t share their views. Let us strive to be more tolerant and embrace diversity in all its forms. Only then can we build a world that is truly inclusive and accepting. So, let us all pledge to be more tolerant and spread the message of peace and understanding.

Tolerance is a virtue that is often overlooked in society today. In a world where differences are constantly highlighted and emphasized, it is easy for people to become intolerant towards others. However, we must remember that tolerance is not about blindly accepting everything or everyone, but about understanding and respecting others.

One of the key benefits of tolerance is that it promotes unity and eliminates conflicts. When we are tolerant towards each other, there is less room for misunderstandings and disagreements. Instead, we learn to coexist peacefully and appreciate our differences.

Tolerance also plays a crucial role in fostering creativity and innovation. By being open to new ideas and perspectives, we can learn from others and come up with new and innovative solutions to problems. This is especially important in a globalized world where diversity is becoming the norm.

Moreover, tolerance helps to create a sense of belonging and inclusivity. When we are accepting of others, no matter their background or beliefs, everyone feels valued and respected. This leads to a more cohesive society where individuals are free to express themselves without fear of judgment or discrimination.

In conclusion, tolerance is a vital attribute that we must cultivate in ourselves and promote in our communities. It allows us to embrace diversity, avoid conflicts, and create a more harmonious world. Let us strive to be more tolerant and spread this message of acceptance and understanding to make the world a better place for everyone.

Tolerance Short Story:

Once upon a time, in the small town of Maple Creek, there lived two neighbors – Mr. Johnson and Mrs. Smith. Both of them were good friends and would often spend their evenings chatting on Mr. Johnson’s porch.

One day, while they were discussing various topics, Mrs. Smith brought up the subject of tolerance. She insisted that it was an important quality to possess in today’s society. Mr. Johnson, who was known for his short temper, scoffed at the idea and said that he didn’t believe in tolerating anyone who didn’t share his beliefs or values.

Mrs. Smith was taken aback by this response and decided to put Mr. Johnson’s tolerance to test. She invited her friend, Mrs. Patel, who was from a different cultural background, over for dinner the next day. Mrs. Patel had recently moved to Maple Creek and didn’t know anyone in the town.

As soon as Mr. Johnson saw Mrs. Patel, he felt uncomfortable and wanted her to leave immediately. However, Mrs. Smith insisted that she stay for dinner and get to know each other better.

Throughout the evening, Mr. Johnson was rude and made insensitive comments about Mrs. Patel’s cultural practices. But to his surprise, Mrs. Patel remained calm and didn’t take offense to any of his remarks. Instead, she patiently explained the significance behind her traditions and even shared some delicious traditional dishes with them.

By the end of the night, Mr. Johnson realized that he had been quick to judge and that his actions were not in line with the idea of tolerance. He apologized to Mrs. Patel for his behavior and thanked her for opening his eyes.

From that day on, Mr. Johnson became more open-minded and accepting towards people from different backgrounds. He learned that tolerance was not just about tolerating differences but also about embracing them and learning from them. Mrs. Smith was glad that her friend had a change of heart and they both laughed at the irony of the situation – Mr. Johnson, who didn’t believe in tolerance, ended up learning one of life’s most valuable lessons from someone he initially couldn’t tolerate.

This short story is a reminder that in today’s diverse world, it is important to practice tolerance towards others, even if their beliefs or values may differ from our own. By doing so, we not only create a more harmonious society but also grow as individuals by learning from each other’s perspectives and experiences.

Essay on Importance of Tolerance in Daily Life:

Tolerance is a virtue that has been emphasized by human societies for centuries. It refers to the ability to accept and respect differences in beliefs, opinions, and cultures without any hostility or discrimination. In today’s world filled with diversity, tolerance is more important than ever before. It plays a crucial role in maintaining social harmony and promoting peaceful coexistence.

One of the primary reasons why tolerance is essential in daily life is that it allows individuals to live together peacefully despite having differences. It helps people to understand and appreciate each other’s unique backgrounds, cultures, and perspectives without feeling threatened or judged. This, in turn, leads to a more inclusive and diverse community where everyone can feel accepted and valued.

Moreover, tolerance also enables open-mindedness and critical thinking. When individuals are tolerant, they are more likely to listen and consider different viewpoints instead of immediately dismissing them. This not only promotes healthy discussions but also encourages personal growth and development by challenging preconceived notions and biases.

In addition to promoting social cohesion, tolerance also contributes to personal well-being. By being tolerant towards others, individuals can reduce stress and avoid unnecessary conflicts. It allows them to focus on positive interactions and relationships, leading to a more fulfilling and satisfying life.

Furthermore, tolerance is crucial for building a peaceful and sustainable world. In today’s interconnected globalized society, it is essential to have mutual understanding and respect between people from different nations, cultures, and backgrounds. Tolerance helps bridge the gaps between individuals and promotes peace and cooperation.

However, despite its importance, tolerance is not always easy to practice. It requires patience, empathy, and a willingness to learn and understand others. In today’s world where divisiveness and intolerance seem prevalent, it is important for individuals to cultivate tolerance in their daily lives.

There are several ways individuals can incorporate tolerance into their everyday routine. One of the most effective ways is by educating oneself and others about different cultures, beliefs, and perspectives. This can be done through reading, attending cultural events, or engaging in conversations with people from diverse backgrounds.

Furthermore, practicing empathy and actively listening to others without judgment also promotes tolerance. It allows individuals to understand the feelings and experiences of others and encourages mutual respect and understanding.

In conclusion, tolerance is a crucial virtue that should be embraced in our daily lives. It promotes peace, inclusivity, personal growth, and a better understanding of the world around us. By practicing tolerance, we can create a more harmonious society and build a better future for generations to come.

So let us all strive towards becoming more tolerant individuals and make the world a better place for everyone. As human beings, it is our responsibility to promote and practice tolerance in our daily lives, for a better and more harmonious world. Let us learn from each other’s differences and embrace diversity with open arms, for that is where true beauty lies.

How to Promote Tolerance in Society:

In today’s world, where diversity is the norm and people from different backgrounds live and work together, tolerance has become an essential value. It refers to the ability to accept and respect differences in beliefs, cultures, and behaviors without judgment or discrimination.

Tolerance plays a crucial role in promoting harmony, peace, and understanding among individuals and communities. Here are some ways we can promote tolerance in society:

1. Education

Education is one of the most powerful tools to promote tolerance in society. It helps people understand different perspectives, cultures, and beliefs, paving the way for acceptance and respect. Schools should include lessons on diversity, human rights, and inclusion in their curriculum. Moreover, educational institutions should encourage students to participate in cultural exchange programs and engage with individuals from diverse backgrounds.

2. Encourage Dialogue

Effective communication is key to promoting tolerance. It allows people to share their views and understand others’ perspectives without judgment. We should encourage open and respectful dialogue, especially on contentious issues, which can help bridge the gap between different groups and promote understanding.

3. Lead by Example

As individuals, we have the power to promote tolerance in our communities by setting an example through our actions and words. We can lead by accepting and respecting diversity in our daily interactions with others, whether it’s at work or in our neighborhoods.

4. Address Biases and Stereotypes

We all have biases, conscious or unconscious, that can lead to stereotypes and discrimination. It’s crucial to recognize and address these biases within ourselves and educate others about their harmful effects. We should also challenge stereotypes and misinformation whenever we encounter them.

5. Support Inclusive Policies

Policies that promote equality, diversity, and inclusion are essential for building a tolerant society. Governments, organizations, and institutions should develop and implement inclusive policies that address issues of discrimination, promote diversity, and provide equal opportunities for all.

6. Engage in Community Service

Volunteering and community service are great ways to promote tolerance in society. It allows individuals from different backgrounds to work together towards a common goal, fostering understanding and respect. Additionally, it gives us the opportunity to learn about other cultures and experiences, breaking down barriers and promoting acceptance.

7. Utilize Social Media

Social media has become a powerful tool for promoting tolerance in society. It allows us to connect with people from different backgrounds, share stories and experiences, and educate others about diversity and inclusion. We should use social media platforms responsibly to spread positivity and promote tolerance.

8. Celebrate Diversity

Instead of seeing diversity as a source of division, we should celebrate it. Every culture and individual brings something unique to the table, and embracing these differences can help build more tolerant communities. We can organize cultural events and festivals that showcase different traditions and encourage people to learn from one another.

>>>>>>>> Related Post:    Paragraph on Moral Values For Students

In conclusion, promoting tolerance in society is an ongoing process that requires effort and commitment from all of us. By educating ourselves and others, fostering dialogue, and embracing diversity, we can create a more tolerant world where everyone feels accepted and respected. Let’s work towards building a society where differences are celebrated rather than discriminated against.

Related Posts:

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Tolerance is more than putting up with things – it’s a moral virtue

Honarary Research Fellow in Psychology , Australian Catholic University

Disclosure statement

Rivka T. Witenberg received funding from Large ARC SPIRT Grant; Department of Psychology Research Support Scheme, University of Melbourne and Australian Catholic University; Centre for Education for Human Values and Tolerance, Bar Ilan University, Tel Aviv, Israel; The University of Melbourne Collaborative research Grant.

Australian Catholic University provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

We hear a lot about tolerance these days.

Tolerance is a moral virtue best placed within the moral domain – but unfortunately it is often confounded with prejudice. Much of the psychological research about tolerance generally and about the development of children’s understanding of tolerance of others who are different from them has been examined through research about prejudice – and not through the moral domain. The assumption made is that absence of prejudice by default means a person is tolerant.

Prejudice and tolerance are actually theoretically different concepts – and not the opposite of each other. In fact, they coexist in most of us.

Tolerance is difficult to define, which may have led to limiting the study of tolerance in psychology in favour of studying prejudice. But, unlike prejudice, tolerance can be grounded in the moral domain which offers a positive approach to examining relationships between groups of people who are different from each other.

Based on its Latin origin, tolerance, or toleration as philosophers often refer to it, is most commonly viewed negatively as “putting up with” something we dislike or even hate. If a person is prepared to “put up with” something – along the lines of, I do not like the colour of your skin but I will still serve you not to lose your custom – that person is someone who does not discriminate but remains intolerant in thoughts and beliefs.

Besides, who wants to be tolerated or be “put up with”?

At the same time tolerance cannot be indiscriminate. Indiscriminate acceptance in its most extreme form could lead to recognition of questionable practice and human rights violations – for instance, child marriages and neo-Nazi propaganda.

Tolerance as a moral virtue

An alternative way for us to think of tolerance is to place it within the moral domain and recognise that it is what it is, a moral virtue.

Many recent philosophers have linked tolerance with respect, equality and liberty. Those such as Michael Dusche , John Rawls and Michael Walzer among others, argue that we should regard tolerance as a positive civic and moral duty between individuals, irrespective of colour, creed or culture.

In other words, it is a moral obligation or duty which involves respect for the individual as well as mutual respect and consideration between people. Tolerance between people makes it possible for conflicting claims of beliefs, values and ideas to coexistence as long as they fit within acceptable moral values.

So while different marriage practices fit in within acceptable moral values, sexual abuse of children is immoral and cannot be tolerated. I believe tolerance is an essential component in social unity and a remedy to intolerance and prejudice.

The idea that tolerance is a moral duty had been acknowledged by earlier civil libertarians, such as John Locke, Baruch Spinoza, John Stuart Mill and others. They argue that tolerant people value the individual, his or her independence and freedom of choice.

When tolerance is placed within the moral domain relating to fairness, justice and respect and avoiding causing harm to others, it can only be viewed as a positive moral virtue.

Psychological research supports the idea that tolerance is better placed within the moral domain. My own research with my students shows the best indicators and predictors of tolerance to human diversity are fairness and empathy.

Fairness and empathy are also very closely connected to moral development and reasoning. They are fundamental to any coherent moral philosophy.

Empathy and morality

Psychologists such as Johnathan Haidt believe empathy is the most important motivator for moral behaviour. Others such as Martin Hoffman argue empathy is a motivator of prosocial and altruistic or unselfish behaviour.

Empathic people are sensitive to the thoughts, feelings and experiences of others. They are able to place themselves in someone else’s shoes or understand how it would feel to be treated badly. Placing oneself in someone else’s shoes is the essence of tolerance.

My research shows that people of all ages including children have a strong sense of fairness and empathy towards others different from them in colour, creed or culture. They reject prejudice and intolerance between 70% and 80% of the time affirming tolerance based on fairness and empathy.

Moral values such as fairness, justice, empathy, tolerance and respect are shared, if not universal, values relevant to dealing with human diversity

Tolerance examined as separate concept could have unique implications for education and social policy. Education aimed at promoting a harmonious society could do well to focus more on the relationship between morality and tolerance. Grounding tolerance in theories of morality allows for an alternative educational approach to promote harmonious intergroup relationships.

Part of this education would involve developing a strong sense of fairness and justice and the ability to empathise with the plight of others who are different in racial characteristics, ethnicity or nationality.

This article is part of a series on public morality in 21st-century Australia.

• Morality series

Audience Development Coordinator (fixed-term maternity cover)

Data and Reporting Analyst

Lecturer (Hindi-Urdu)

Director, Defence and Security

Opportunities with the new CIEHF

Essay On Tolerance

Introduction: Tolerance can be defined as a fair and aim attitude towards those whose lifestyle differs from ours. It is a noble virtue. It is wanted everywhere. It is the virtue that helps us put up with those who have different ways and opinions, and outlooks in life. It also enables us to judge the other sides of things with patience, without losing temper.

In the past, the difference in religion led to prosecution, the difference in politics led to bad-blood and difference in opinions ended in blows. Tolerance is a virtue much needed in our turbulent world. But we must recognize that there is a difference between tolerance and tolerate.

A Social Virtue of Tolerance: Tolerance is the reflection of one’s own behavior and character. The level of tolerance varies from person to person and as per the situation. People have zero tolerance for injustice and violation of the rights. If we want humanity to flourish, then we need to practice tolerance from all walks of life. As tolerance is the spirit of humanity.

Tolerance is not only an abstract virtue but also considerable influence in the current affairs of life. Man, being a social being, has to live in a spirit of harmony and co-operation with others in society. In such a process, give and take is a necessary capacity for compromise.

We cannot persuade others unless we ourselves are at the same time ready to be persuaded by practicing sweet and reasonableness. It is thus seen that tolerance is a social virtue that is opposed to dogmatism, and dictatorship in society compromise time anus is seen. It is impossible to be tolerant if one is hide-bound and rigid in views of full of prejudices.

Real Meaning of Tolerance: Tolerance does not mean to come up against any fundamental principle. Our best self goes down if we tolerate evil. In matters relating to deeper questions and principles of life, it is our duty to stand up for them and refuse an easy compromise. But tolerance does not mean to bear up moral degradation, public nuisance acts, anti-social activities, moral corruption, wrong-doing, exploitation, and deception.

Tolerance involves both humility and meekness, engaging them to say, “I am not perfect, and I am not going to try to make this imperfect soul’s walk harder through my imperfection.”

A tolerant person does not tolerate political and financial dishonesty. But in our personal life and daily dealings, we shall have to belong bearing. Tolerance does not mean to encourage a weak-kneed attitude to life. It has a limit and beyond that, it may become a social crime. Tolerance is a virtue in the simple affairs of life.

Intolerance: Intolerance is quite opposite to it. Thousands of men and women were burnt for the difference in religion. Even today, purges of political opinions have not yet been banished from society. Intolerance comes from bigotry, narrowness, prejudice, and blind self-concept.

The Necessity of Tolerance: The world has not been set to one pattern nor have men been shaped in a single mold. It is essential to pull together with all in society. It helps a man win people’s minds and earn popularity with people. The difference in the environment or condition of life causes a difference in temperament and opinion. A historical revolution has to lead diversities in outlook. Heredity is a factor not to be overlooked.

Each distinctive overlook has its own background. A cultured person takes this into account, makes allowance for them and is ready to make concessions and compromise. Without this broad-mindedness, energy may get wasted in the futile argument. In this long run, mere passion never tends to any good nor solves any problem; passion has to be controlled and disciplined by reason and tolerance.

But as education has spread, the spirit of reason has tended to prevail and the vice of intolerance has fairly diminished. With the passage of time, we are becoming more ready to recognize the possibility of views than our own. We also look upon tolerance as a mark of education and superior culture of ethics of the polite society. All great men were tolerant. They learned it from their boyhood and practical life. The Holy Scripture says, “God loves him who is tolerant.”

Unfortunately, anarchism and intolerance seem to be on the upgrade of late. Extremists with the help of sophisticated military weapons are seeking to destabilize a country, taking a heavy toll of innocent lives. Angry young man, challenging all established norms, now parades the walks of life. Tolerance has been cast to the wilds by them. Our aim should be to tackle them with a strong hand and then, of permissible, bring them to the conference table.

Our duty of Tolerance: John Stuart Mill wrote: “If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”

Tolerance is entertained everywhere. It is not a question that we should either be tolerant or intolerant after we have considered every pro and cons of anything. We know that more tolerant means a fool or a block-headed person. Tolerance does not mean to bear with any violence, injustice, unlawful acts with patience or silence. It means to watch and observe anything out of great patience. It aims or points at keeping politeness before having a clearance of anything.

Conclusion: Tolerance in true sense is to give consideration to others. Tolerance is a reflection of one’s own behavior and character. The consequence of tolerance is good for a tolerant. It is supported by every intellectual whole-heartedly.

Information Sources:

• churchofjesuschrist.org
• ontaheen.com

Importance of Rivers

A visit to a village market, paper – foundation of civilization, teaching as a profession, the beginning of the solar system’s instability, unexpected south african finding contests recent re-interpretation of magma chambers, importance of liver function, waterlogging (causes and types), capsulized foods, ultraviolet catastrophe, latest post, spark-gap transmitter, how an ignition coil works, new detecting system tries to warn about landslides and tsunamis, root microorganisms might be the key to a better tasting cup of tea, urban climatology.

Beyond Intractability

The Hyper-Polarization Challenge to the Conflict Resolution Field: A Joint BI/CRQ Discussion BI and the Conflict Resolution Quarterly invite you to participate in an online exploration of what those with conflict and peacebuilding expertise can do to help defend liberal democracies and encourage them live up to their ideals.

Follow BI and the Hyper-Polarization Discussion on BI's New Substack Newsletter .

Hyper-Polarization, COVID, Racism, and the Constructive Conflict Initiative Read about (and contribute to) the  Constructive Conflict Initiative  and its associated Blog —our effort to assemble what we collectively know about how to move beyond our hyperpolarized politics and start solving society's problems. 

By Sarah Peterson

Originally published in July 2003, Current Implications added by Heidi Burgess in December, 2019

Current Implications

When Sarah wrote this essay in 2003, social media existed, but it hadn't yet become popular or widespread.  Facebook and Twitter hadn't started yet (Facebook started in 2004, Twitter in 2006.)  More .... 

What is Tolerance?

Tolerance is the appreciation of diversity and the ability to live and let others live. It is the ability to exercise a fair and objective attitude towards those whose opinions, practices, religion, nationality, and so on differ from one's own.[1] As William Ury notes, "tolerance is not just agreeing with one another or remaining indifferent in the face of injustice, but rather showing respect for the essential humanity in every person."[2]

Intolerance is the failure to appreciate and respect the practices, opinions and beliefs of another group. For instance, there is a high degree of intolerance between Israeli Jews and Palestinians who are at odds over issues of identity , security , self-determination , statehood, the right of return for refugees, the status of Jerusalem and many other issues. The result is continuing intergroup conflict and violence .

Why Does Tolerance Matter?

At a post-9/11 conference on multiculturalism in the United States, participants asked, "How can we be tolerant of those who are intolerant of us?"[3] For many, tolerating intolerance is neither acceptable nor possible.

Though tolerance may seem an impossible exercise in certain situations -- as illustrated by Hobbes in the inset box on the right -- being tolerant, nonetheless, remains key to easing hostile tensions between groups and to helping communities move past intractable conflict. That is because tolerance is integral to different groups relating to one another in a respectful and understanding way. In cases where communities have been deeply entrenched in violent conflict, being tolerant helps the affected groups endure the pain of the past and resolve their differences. In Rwanda, the Hutus and the Tutsis have tolerated a reconciliation process , which has helped them to work through their anger and resentment towards one another.

The Origins of Intolerance

In situations where conditions are economically depressed and politically charged, groups and individuals may find it hard to tolerate those that are different from them or have caused them harm. In such cases, discrimination, dehumanization, repression, and violence may occur. This can be seen in the context of Kosovo, where Kosovar Alabanians, grappling with poverty and unemployment, needed a scapegoat, and supported an aggressive Serbian attack against neighboring Bosnian Muslim and Croatian neighbors.

The Consequences of Intolerance

Intolerance will drive groups apart, creating a sense of permanent separation between them. For example, though the laws of apartheid in South Africa were abolished nine years ago, there still exists a noticeable level of personal separation between black and white South Africans, as evidenced in studies on the levels of perceived social distance between the two groups.[4] This continued racial division perpetuates the problems of intergroup resentment and hostility.

How is Intolerance Perpetuated?

Between Individuals: In the absence of their own experiences, individuals base their impressions and opinions of one another on assumptions. These assumptions can be influenced by the positive or negative beliefs of those who are either closest or most influential in their lives, including parents or other family members, colleagues, educators, and/or role models. 

In the Media: Individual attitudes are influenced by the images of other groups in the media, and the press. For instance, many Serbian communities believed that the western media portrayed a negative image of the Serbian people during the NATO bombing in Kosovo and Serbia.[5] This de-humanization may have contributed to the West's willingness to bomb Serbia. However, there are studies that suggest media images may not influence individuals in all cases. For example, a study conducted on stereotypes discovered people of specific towns in southeastern Australia did not agree with the negative stereotypes of Muslims presented in the media.[6]

In Education: There exists school curriculum and educational literature that provide biased and/or negative historical accounts of world cultures. Education or schooling based on myths can demonize and dehumanize other cultures rather than promote cultural understanding and a tolerance for diversity and differences.

What Can Be Done to Deal with Intolerance?

To encourage tolerance, parties to a conflict and third parties must remind themselves and others that tolerating tolerance is preferable to tolerating intolerance. Following are some useful strategies that may be used as tools to promote tolerance.

Intergroup Contact: There is evidence that casual intergroup contact does not necessarily reduce intergroup tensions, and may in fact exacerbate existing animosities. However, through intimate intergroup contact, groups will base their opinions of one another on personal experiences, which can reduce prejudices . Intimate intergroup contact should be sustained over a week or longer in order for it to be effective.[7]

In Dialogue: To enhance communication between both sides, dialogue mechanisms such as dialogue groups or problem solving workshops  provide opportunities for both sides to express their needs and interests. In such cases, actors engaged in the workshops or similar forums feel their concerns have been heard and recognized. Restorative justice programs such as victim-offender mediation provide this kind of opportunity as well. For instance, through victim-offender mediation, victims can ask for an apology from the offender and the offender can make restitution and ask for forgiveness.[8]

What Individuals Can Do

Individuals should continually focus on being tolerant of others in their daily lives. This involves consciously challenging the stereotypes and assumptions that they typically encounter in making decisions about others and/or working with others either in a social or a professional environment.

What the Media Can Do

The media should use positive images to promote understanding and cultural sensitivity. The more groups and individuals are exposed to positive media messages about other cultures, the less they are likely to find faults with one another -- particularly those communities who have little access to the outside world and are susceptible to what the media tells them. See the section on stereotypes  to learn more about how the media perpetuate negative images of different groups.

What the Educational System Can Do

Educators are instrumental in promoting tolerance and peaceful coexistence . For instance, schools that create a tolerant environment help young people respect and understand different cultures. In Israel, an Arab and Israeli community called Neve Shalom or Wahat Al-Salam ("Oasis of Peace") created a school designed to support inter-cultural understanding by providing children between the first and sixth grades the opportunity to learn and grow together in a tolerant environment.[9]

What Other Third Parties Can Do

Conflict transformation NGOs (non-governmental organizations) and other actors in the field of peacebuilding can offer mechanisms such as trainings to help parties to a conflict communicate better with one another. For instance, several organizations have launched a series of projects in Macedonia that aim to reduce tensions between the country's Albanian, Romani and Macedonian populations, including activities that promote democracy, ethnic tolerance, and respect for human rights.[10]

International organizations need to find ways to enshrine the principles of tolerance in policy. For instance, the United Nations has already created The Declaration of Moral Principles on Tolerance, adopted and signed in Paris by UNESCO's 185 member states on Nov. 16, 1995, which qualifies tolerance as a moral, political, and legal requirement for individuals, groups, and states.[11]

Governments also should aim to institutionalize policies of tolerance. For example, in South Africa, the Education Ministry has advocated the integration of a public school tolerance curriculum into the classroom; the curriculum promotes a holistic approach to learning . The United States government has recognized one week a year as international education week, encouraging schools, organizations, institutions, and individuals to engage in projects and exchanges to heighten global awareness of cultural differences.

The Diaspora community can also play an important role in promoting and sustaining tolerance. They can provide resources to ease tensions and affect institutional policies in a positive way. For example, Jewish, Irish, and Islamic communities have contributed to the peacebuilding effort within their places of origin from their places of residence in the United States. [12]

When Sarah wrote this essay in 2003, social media existed, but it hadn't yet become popular or widespread.  Facebook and Twitter hadn't started yet (Facebook started in 2004, Twitter in 2006.) 

In addition, while the conflict between the right and the left and the different races certainly existed in the United States, it was not nearly as escalated or polarized as it is now in 2019.  For those reasons (and others), the original version of this essay didn't discuss political or racial tolerance or intolerance in the United States.  Rather than re-writing the original essay, all of which is still valid, I have chosen to update it with these "Current Implications." 

In 2019, the intolerance between the Left and the Right in the United States has gotten extreme. Neither side is willing to accept the legitimacy of the values, beliefs, or actions of the other side, and they are not willing to tolerate those values, beliefs or actions whatsoever. That means, in essence, that they will not tolerate the people who hold those views, and are doing everything they can to disempower, delegitimize, and in some cases, dehumanize the other side.

Further, while intolerance is not new, efforts to spread and strengthen it have been greatly enhanced with the current day traditional media and social media environments: the proliferation of cable channels that allow narrowcasting to particular audiences, and Facebook and Twitter (among many others) that serve people only information that corresponds to (or even strengthens) their already biased views. The availability of such information channels both helps spread intolerance; it also makes the effects of that intolerance more harmful.

Intolerance and its correlaries (disempowerment, delegitimization, and dehumanization) are perhaps clearest on the right, as the right currently holds the U.S. presidency and controls the statehouses in many states.  This gives them more power to assert their views and disempower, delegitimize and dehumanize the other.  (Consider the growing restrictions on minority voting rights, the delegitimization of transgendered people and supporters, and the dehumanizing treatment of would-be immigrants at the southern border.) 

But the left is doing the same thing when it can.  By accusing the right of being "haters," the left delegitimizes the right's values and beliefs, many of which are not borne of animus, but rather a combination of bad information being spewed by fake news in social and regular media, and natural neurobiological tendencies which cause half of the population to be biologically more fearful, more reluctant to change, and more accepting of (and needing) a strong leader. 

Put together, such attitudes feed upon one another, causing an apparently never-ending escalation and polarization spiral of intolerance.  Efforts to build understanding and tolerance, just as described in the original article, are still much needed today both in the United States and across the world. 

The good news is that many such efforts exist.  The Bridge Alliance , for instance, is an organization of almost 100 member organizations which are working to bridge the right-left divide in the U.S.  While the Bridge Alliance doesn't use the term "tolerance" or "coexistence" in its framing " Four Principles ," they do call for U.S. leaders and the population to "work together" to meet our challenges.  "Working together" requires not only "tolerance for " and "coexistence with" the other side; it also requires respect for other people's views. That is something that many of the member organizations are trying to establish with red-blue dialogues, public fora, and other bridge-building activities.  We need much, much more of that now in 2019 if we are to be able to strengthen tolerance against the current intolerance onslaught.

One other thing we'd like to mention that was touched upon in the original article, but not explored much, is what can and should be done when the views or actions taken by the other side are so abhorent that they cannot and should not be tolerated? A subset of that question is one Sarah did pose above '"How can we be tolerant of those who are intolerant of us?"[3] For many, tolerating intolerance is neither acceptable nor possible." Sarah answers that by arguing that tolerance is beneficial--by implication, even in those situations. 

What she doesn't explicitly consider, however, is the context of the intolerance.  If one is considering the beliefs or behavior of another that doesn't affect anyone else--a personal decision to live in a particular way (such as following a particular religion for example), we would agree that tolerance is almost always beneficial, as it is more likely to lead to interpersonal trust and further understanding. 

However, if one is considering beliefs or actions of another that does affect other people--particularly actions that affect large numbers of people, then that is a different situation.  We do not tolerate policies that allow the widespread dissemination of fake news and allow foreign governments to manipulate our minds such that they can manipulate our elections.  That, in our minds is intolerable.  So too are actions that destroy the rule of law in this country; actions that threaten our democratic system.

But that doesn't mean that we should respond to intolerance in kind.  Rather, we would argue, one should respond to intolerance with respectful dissent--explaining why the intolerance is unfairly stereotyping an entire group of people; explaining why such stereotyping is both untrue and harmful; why a particular action is unacceptable because it threatens the integrity of our democratic system, explaining alternative ways of getting one's needs met. 

This can be done without attacking the people who are guilty of intolerance with direct personal attacks--calling them "haters," or shaming them for having voted a particular way.  That just hardens the other sides' intolerance. 

Still, reason-based arguments probably won't be accepted right away.  Much neuroscience research explains that emotions trump facts and that people won't change their minds when presented with alternative facts--they will just reject those facts.  But if people are presented with facts in the form of respectful discussion instead of personal attacks, that is both a factual and an emotional approach that can help de-escalate tensions and eventually allow for the development of tolerance.  Personal attacks on the intolerant will not do that.  So when Sarah asked whether one should tolerate intolerance, I would say "no, one should not." But that doesn't mean that you have to treat the intolerant person disrespectfully or "intolerantly."  Rather, model good, respectful behavior.  Model the behavior you would like them to adopt.  And use that to try to fight the intolerance, rather than simply "tolerating it." 

-- Heidi and Guy Burgess. December, 2019.

Back to Essay Top

---------------------------------------------------------

[1] The American Heritage Dictionary (New York: Dell Publishing, 1994).

[2] William Ury, Getting To Peace (New York: The Penguin Group, 1999), 127.

[3] As identified by Serge Schmemann, a New York Times columnist noted in his piece of Dec. 29, 2002, in The New York Times entitled "The Burden of Tolerance in a World of Division" that tolerance is a burden rather than a blessing in today's society.

[4] Jannie Malan, "From Exclusive Aversion to Inclusive Coexistence," Short Paper, African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes (ACCORD), Conference on Coexistence Community Consultations, Durban, South Africa, January 2003, 6.

[5] As noted by Susan Sachs, a New York Times columnist in her piece of Dec. 16, 2001, in The New York Times entitled "In One Muslim Land, an Effort to Enforce Lessons of Tolerance."

[6] Amber Hague, "Attitudes of high school students and teachers towards Muslims and Islam in a southeaster Australian community," Intercultural Education 2 (2001): 185-196.

[7] Yehuda Amir, "Contact Hypothesis in Ethnic Relations," in Weiner, Eugene, eds. The Handbook of Interethnic Coexistence (New York: The Continuing Publishing Company, 2000), 162-181.

[8] The Ukrainian Centre for Common Ground has launched a successful restorative justice project. Information available on-line at www.sfcg.org .

[9] Neve Shalom homepage [on-line]; available at www.nswas.com ; Internet.

[10] Lessons in Tolerance after Conflict.  http://www.beyondintractability.org/library/external-resource?biblio=9997

[11] "A Global Quest for Tolerance" [article on-line] (UNESCO, 1995, accessed 11 February 2003); available at http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/fight-against-discrimination/promoting-tolerance/ ; Internet.

[12] Louis Kriesberg, "Coexistence and the Reconciliation of Communal Conflicts." In Weiner, Eugene, eds. The Handbook of Interethnic Coexistence (New York: The Continuing Publishing Company, 2000), 182-198.

Use the following to cite this article: Peterson, Sarah. "Tolerance." Beyond Intractability . Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: July 2003 < http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/tolerance >.

Additional Resources

The intractable conflict challenge.

Our inability to constructively handle intractable conflict is the most serious, and the most neglected, problem facing humanity. Solving today's tough problems depends upon finding better ways of dealing with these conflicts.   More...

Selected Recent BI Posts Including Hyper-Polarization Posts

• Lorelei Kelly on Strengthening Democracy at the Top and the Bottom -- Lorelei Kelly describes the work of the bipartisan Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress which passed 202 recommendations, many unanimously. Over 1/2 have been implemented and most others are in progress.
• Massively Parallel Peace and Democracy Building Links for the Week of March 24, 2024 -- A rename of our regular "colleague and context links" to highlight how these readings and the activities they describe all fit within our "massively parallel" peace and democracy building framework--or show why it is needed.
• Massively Parallel Peace and Democracy Building Roles - Part 1 -- People engaged in massively parallel peace and democracy building play at least 50 different roles. In Part 1 of this three part series, we explore the roles played by the "strategizers," or "big thinkers" who help us understand the both nature of the problem and possible responses.

Get the Newsletter Check Out Our Quick Start Guide

Educators Consider a low-cost BI-based custom text .

Constructive Conflict Initiative

Join Us in calling for a dramatic expansion of efforts to limit the destructiveness of intractable conflict.

Things You Can Do to Help Ideas

Practical things we can all do to limit the destructive conflicts threatening our future.

Conflict Frontiers

A free, open, online seminar exploring new approaches for addressing difficult and intractable conflicts. Major topic areas include:

Scale, Complexity, & Intractability

Massively Parallel Peacebuilding

Authoritarian Populism

Constructive Confrontation

Conflict Fundamentals

An look at to the fundamental building blocks of the peace and conflict field covering both “tractable” and intractable conflict.

Beyond Intractability / CRInfo Knowledge Base

Home / Browse | Essays | Search | About

BI in Context

Links to thought-provoking articles exploring the larger, societal dimension of intractability.

Colleague Activities

Information about interesting conflict and peacebuilding efforts.

Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Beyond Intractability or the Conflict Information Consortium.

Beyond Intractability 

Unless otherwise noted on individual pages, all content is... Copyright © 2003-2022 The Beyond Intractability Project c/o the Conflict Information Consortium All rights reserved. Content may not be reproduced without prior written permission.

Guidelines for Using Beyond Intractability resources.

Citing Beyond Intractability resources.

Photo Credits for Homepage, Sidebars, and Landing Pages

Contact Beyond Intractability    Privacy Policy The Beyond Intractability Knowledge Base Project  Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess , Co-Directors and Editors  c/o  Conflict Information Consortium Mailing Address: Beyond Intractability, #1188, 1601 29th St. Suite 1292, Boulder CO 80301, USA Contact Form

Powered by  Drupal

production_1

• Environment
• Road to Net Zero
• Art & Design
• Film & TV
• Music & On-stage
• Pop Culture
• Fashion & Beauty
• Home & Garden
• Things to do
• Combat Sports
• Horse Racing
• Beyond the Headlines
• Trending Middle East
• Business Extra
• Culture Bites
• Year of Elections
• Pocketful of Dirhams
• Books of My Life
• Iraq: 20 Years On

Tolerance is essential for peaceful coexistence in the modern world

Intolerance has no place in a society where our differences make us not only unique but stronger.

Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed, Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, led hundreds of people at the Walk of Tolerance in Umm Al Emarat Park in Abu Dhabi earlier this year. Saeed Jumoh

Matilda Rice, 17, is the winner of the UAE Young Journalist Award presented by the British embassy, in partnership with The National. Submissions were open to UAE students aged between 16 to 18. Below is her prize-winning essay on tolerance called An Enduring Paradox.

Tolerance is a powerful word. It represents a set of values that we as a society hope to follow, conveying inclusion, openness and respect, and encouraging acceptance of others. It is a virtue that many aspire to as it creates a world where discrimination is obsolete.

Modern societies are more globalised, diverse and multicultural than ever. Societies that were once monocultural have been transformed into eclectic melting pots, filled with people from across the globe. In this new complex world, our differences have never been so evident. This new reality means that interactions with people who hold different viewpoints to our own are something that we experience on a daily basis. Tolerance has become a necessity for peaceful coexistence in the modern world.

But tolerance is more complex than it may first appear. Here we encounter one of society’s oldest dilemmas: the paradox of tolerance. Proposed by Karl Popper in 1945, the paradox is a philosophical principle that states: “In order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.” For Popper, tolerance had boundaries. Unfettered tolerance would open the door for dominance by the intolerant. In the words of Charles Spurgeon" "Give them an inch and they will take a mile”.

Should we condone the intolerant? Can we truly call ourselves tolerant if we choose not to? For many, the answer is no. They believe that if we do not tolerate intolerance, then by definition we are intolerant because we are discriminating against those who hold different views.

It is my belief that the exact opposite is true. Popper’s belief that tolerance can only truly exist in a society where people who are intolerant are not accepted is one that I agree with. By allowing intolerance to exist, you risk it spreading and destroying unity and tolerance. I believe that this is a risk that we should not be willing to take. This sentiment is one that many countries are beginning to agree with, including the UAE.

The UAE is one of the most multicultural countries in the world, with people from more than 200 nationalities living here. For decades, it has worked to establish itself as a global capital for tolerance, fostering acceptance and unity and integrating open-mindedness into the very fabric of its society. When 2019 was declared the Year of Tolerance in the UAE, it was an important step in highlighting the value of tolerance and raising awareness of the country’s aims to engender morals of collaboration and coexistence, both locally and internationally.

Tolerance also has strong connections to the UAE’s origins. It was a key pillar of Sheikh Zayed’s thoughts and formed the bedrock of many of his principles. His work to instill peace and unity through the creation of the UAE’s tolerant approach formed a country where acceptance and compassion eclipse hostility and acrimony.

The UAE also ensures its residents understand that intolerance will not be accepted. Legislations such as the Anti-Discrimination and Hatred Act , which states that residents should "refrain from discriminating against people for reasons based on their religion, doctrine, caste, race, colour, or ethnic origin", emphasises the UAE's strong condemnation of prejudice.

Intolerance leads to hatred and discrimination. It has no place in society where our differences make us not only unique but stronger. The UAE is one of the few countries that has worked to effectively remove discrimination. By inspiring peace and understanding and condemning prejudice , it is creating a society in which all are equal. It has taught us that when we choose to embrace others, we choose to change the world for the better.

Matilda Rice is a student at British International School Abu Dhabi

• Secretary-General
• Statements and Messages

Tolerance Means Recognizing Diversity as Strength, Secretary-General Says in Message for International Day

Tolerance Means Recognizing Diversity as Strength, Secretary-General Says   in Message for International Day   Following is UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s message for the International Day for Tolerance, to be observed on 16 November: We are living through a period of global transition.  New centres of power and economic dynamism are emerging.  Technology is connecting us ever more closely, and cross-cultural exchanges are deepening every day — but this does not mean there is more understanding.  Societies are more diverse but intolerance is on the rise in too many places. Across the globe, nations and communities face profound and enduring economic, social and environmental challenges.  Poverty, hunger and disease remain at unacceptable levels.  Every region is experiencing the rising impact of climate change.  Natural disasters are a constant reminder of human vulnerability.  Conflicts and inter-community tensions persist across the globe.  Millions face the daily threat of violence and displacement. There are no individual solutions to these multifaceted and interrelated challenges.  We can only advance as a community of nations and cultures, drawing on human solidarity and recognizing that we share a common destiny.  This is why tolerance is so important. Tolerance is not passive.  It demands an active choice to reach out on the basis of mutual understanding and respect, especially where disagreement exists.  Tolerance means recognizing that our diversity is a strength — a wellspring of creativity and renewal for all societies. Tolerance can, and must, be learned.  We need to teach girls and boys not just how to live together but how to act together as global citizens.  We need to nurture tolerance by promoting cultural understanding and respect — from parliaments to the playground.  We need to tackle growing inequality and reject social exclusion based on gender, disabilities, sexual orientation, and ethnic or religious background. Tolerance is the strongest foundation for peace and reconciliation.  At this time of rapid and often bewildering change, it has never been so important.  On this International Day, I call on national and community leaders — and all those who wield influence through traditional and social media and among their peers — to embrace tolerance as the bond that will unite us on our common journey to a peaceful, sustainable future. * *** * For information media • not an official record

Facebook Twitter Email Print LinkedIn

March 2, 2021

The U.S. Needs Tolerance More Than Unity

Tolerance allows us to live in harmony despite deep-seated differences

By Kumar Yogeeswaran , Levi Adelman & Maykel Verkuyten

Sun rises behind the U.S. Capitol as preparations are made prior to the 59th inaugural ceremony for President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris in Washington, D.C., on January 20, 2021.

Caroline Brehman Getty Images

The 2020 United States election and the ensuing riot are further evidence—as if we needed more—of how deeply divided the country is today. The divisions are regional, ideological, cultural, moral and, some say, intractable. A team of prominent scientists recently warned of the dangers of a new foundational threat to the republic: political sectarianism , or the tendency to adopt a moralized identification with a political group and against another.

In response to this enormous divide, politicians have pushed for greater unity and a return to the bipartisanship of the past. In his inauguration speech , President Biden told the nation that “disagreement must not lead to disunion.” In the midst of a pandemic, economic collapse, political polarization, racial unrest and a climate crisis, cooperation between citizens is indeed more essential than ever. Psychological research also reveals the importance of unity in the form of a shared identity, such as belonging to the same nation, to promote trust and cooperation. However, the focus on unity is also often understood to be an argument for uniformity or assimilation to specific values and beliefs—which is not particularly realistic. In a large and diverse nation, a more practical solution to the current partisan divide is though tolerance of our differences.

Societies have relied on tolerance for millennia, in contexts as varied as ancient India during the Mauryan Empire, the Middle East during the Ottoman Empire, and Europe after the Reformation. In philosophical, political and psychological texts, tolerance refers to granting equal freedoms and rights, particularly to others whose beliefs, values, and actions we disapprove of. As President John F. Kennedy once said: “Tolerance implies no lack of commitment to one’s own beliefs. Rather it condemns the oppression or persecution of others.” Tolerance does not imply compromising our values, beliefs or way of life, but rather allowing others to live life as they wish because our reasons to endure these differences (such as a respect for others’ freedom of expression) outweigh our reasons for objection.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Tolerance functions as a barrier to discrimination . Unlike the goal of unity, tolerance does not involve compliance or social pressure, which can backfire . Instead, by asking us to reflect on internalized reasons to accept that which we disapprove of, rather than demanding people relinquish their deeply held beliefs or values, tolerance mitigates the risk of conflict in a pluralistic society.

Psychologically, tolerance can be difficult because it requires us to hold two seemingly contradictory opinions: disapproval of another’s beliefs, with simultaneous support of their equal right to express these beliefs. It is this psychological dance that makes tolerance difficult to accomplish yet also allows us to live in harmony despite deep-seated differences. Tolerance does not imply neutrality (i.e., no judgment), indifference (i.e., a “whatever” attitude) or relativism (i.e., “anything goes”) toward difference. It simply asks that people engage with differences by weighing our objections alongside reasons to permit what we might personally disapprove of. After all, an atheist is unlikely to persuade a devout Christian to abandon their religion, any more than a Christian can convince an ardent atheist about the veracity of their faith. However, despite disagreement and even disapproval, both can learn to tolerate each other’s beliefs.

Tolerance is what makes real diversity possible . By creating social spaces and norms where we can share our lives and society with people with whom we disagree, it offers room for dialogue, mutual understanding, and recognition of shared and equal citizenship of our opponents, even if we disapprove of their beliefs, practices and values. Tolerance is about respecting other people as equal citizens and human beings, not respecting their viewpoints. Disagreements about our values and beliefs are inevitable, and they are acceptable, so long as we can maintain mutual respect toward others as equal citizens and fellow human beings.

However, tolerance is possible only if we reduce moralization on every point of difference. Moralization refers to the process by which people’s preferences or previously neutral behaviors take on moral meanings . When behaviors such as eating meat, cigarette smoking, premarital sex or religious schooling become moralized, they elicit powerful moral emotions, institutional action against the behavior, and even censure or condemnation from others. Moralization is, therefore, a barrier to tolerance because perceived immorality defines the boundaries of what can be tolerated . Since people consider matters of morality as objective, absolute and beyond compromise, attaching strong moral significance to every point of disagreement and difference makes tolerance almost impossible.

Instead, it takes, for example, intellectual humility (i.e., a degree to which people recognize their beliefs could be wrong), wise reasoning (i.e., understanding the intertwined nature of human life, and knowledge about oneself alongside one’s limitations) or dialectical thinking (i.e., tolerance for seemingly contradictory beliefs) to make tolerance possible. By encouraging people to balance reasons for disapproval against reasons to tolerate that which we disapprove of, tolerance makes dialogue and debate possible.

It’s also essential that our political leaders and institutions do their part to promote social norms around toleration of differences. This can be done, for example, by national and community level leadership demonstrating a willingness to disagree, debate, and endure differences. Moreover, institutions can establish inclusive social norms with egalitarian citizenship regimes that allow for differences to be expressed, even if these are only tolerated. Such norms can collectively help us learn how to live together despite our differences.

In a nation divided between two almost equally powerful political factions, tolerance is a necessity for avoiding future conflict . Neither side of the political divide is going to vanquish the other, or eradicate opposing beliefs, practices and values entirely. Calls for unity by leaders and institutions are a marked improvement from messages of division. However, tolerance is going to be a more realistic, and more effective, strategy for addressing irreconcilable divisions stemming from ideological, religious, cultural and moral differences that are inevitable in a large, free, pluralistic nation.

Kumar Yogeeswaran is an associate professor of social psychology at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. His primary research is on the topics of diversity, social identity, implicit bias, and intergroup conflict in pluralistic nations.

Levi Adelman is a postdoctoral scholar at the European Research Center on Migration and Ethnic Relations (ERCOMER) at Utrecht University, Netherlands. His research examines the psychology of in-group criticism and intergroup toleration.

Maykel Verkuyten is a professor of interdisciplinary social science at Utrecht University, Netherlands and former academic director at the European Research Center on Migration and Ethnic Relations (ERCOMER). His research focuses on the topics of intergroup relations, and ethnic, religious and national identities.

Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay

Introduction, hindu-buddhism, chinese religions, abraham monotheism.

Religious tolerance is imperative in modern societies because it allows people with separate faiths, beliefs or values to coexist with one another. Acknowledgment of the validity of other people’s religions requires placing these different religions in their traditional contexts in order to understand them.

Furthermore, understanding the history of other cultures allows one to appreciate how similar experiences led to different conceptual systems. One must realize that people created their belief systems in order to make sense of their worlds or the chaos around them. Therefore, every religion is reflective of the culture and history of its followers.

In order to become religiously tolerant, one must familiarize oneself with the history of this religion. The Hindu pattern is again evidence of the fact that all religions are depictions of the experiences of the people involved and the conceptual systems that they deduced from them.

The Hindu religion has more than one holy text, more than one religious authority, several deities, theological systems and understandings of morality. Adherents of this religion are highly tolerant because of its henotheistic nature. Nonetheless, most followers still believe in one Supreme Being who manifests his powers through different divinities.

Central aspects of Hinduism include Vishnu (the preserver), Brahma (the creator) and Shiva (the destroyer). Belief in the cycle of life i.e. the Samsara is central to the teaching of these adherents. However, it is possible for one to achieve enlightenment and thus escape this cycle. Many assert that one’s present life stems from the consequences of one’s past life.

This religion has four major doctrines that include dharma (righteousness in religion), artha (economic success) and kama (sense gratification) and nivritti (renunciation of the world). The latter is achieved through renunciation of the world in a process called moksha. Mankind’s supreme goal is to reach moksha.

Therefore, moksha is a solution of samsara. It is derived from the Buddhist faith. Doctrines from the latter religion were crucial in resolving complications in this religion. All these concepts can be traced back to the history of the Hindu religion. By dissecting the experiences of the Hindu people, one can understand why they came to follow their present practices and this should foster religious tolerance among non Hindus (Esposito et al., 2002).

The Hindu religion began as far back as 4000 BCE in the Indus Valley. It began with the Indus valley culture, which was held by native Indians. Thereafter, some Aryan tribes from Central Asia and Europe entered India and introduced Vedism. Since their immigration was done slowly or in waves (according to recent scholarly discoveries), most natives easily took up the Aryan religious with ease. This explains how the latter religion started amalgamating different belief systems. The Vedic belief system underwent various changes between 900 and 500 BCE. At first, the religion began with an emphasis on sacrificial rites. Emphasis was on perfecting people’s performance of the rites. However with time, some intellectuals decided that focusing too much on the rites instead of the wisdom associated with them was wrong.

They were called the Upanishads, and they introduced the focus on total dissociation from society in order to reach ultimate spirituality. They challenged the original structures of the Vedic religion because the latter was highly organized around sacrifices and priestly rituals. The priests who performed these rites were called Brahmans. They represented the capacity of the human to possess divine power.

When the Upanishads introduced their concept of total detachment from society or moksha, the Brahmans felt that this would threaten the organization of their society. As a result, they proposed a middle way in which one could strive towards moksha but still maintain the social hierarchies in society. It should be noted that the priestly class of the Brahmans arose earlier on in the Vedic faith because of some fire rituals that the Vedic believers carried out.

These rituals yielded successful results and led to the belief that their priests had a superior status. The Upanishads wanted to internalize the ritualistic process, hence their shift to the individual. This belief in developing the spiritual self led to the acceptance of moksha as a solution towards the problem of cyclical life (Fallows, 1998).

Thus far, one can appreciate why Hinduism has a hierarchical system that places the priestly class above all others. This was a way of preserving order in their society. One can also appreciate why the religion appears to be polytheistic. The god of fire and other gods were manifestations of a supreme being. One can also comprehend why these adherents believe in moksha; it provides them with a mechanism for solving the problems of this life.

It also gives them something to aspire to or work towards. This small history, therefore, heightens religious tolerance because it places these belief systems in context and establishes the experiences that led to their development. Some of them were social (entry of the Aryans into the Hindu culture), others were intellectual (internalizing rituals) while others were economic (preservation of social order for material prosperity).

In China, some people practice Taoism, others Confucianism and others believe in Buddhism. Certain followers combine elements of all three faiths. The experiences of members of these cultures also provide important insights concerning the influence of people’s experiences in the development of their belief system. By placing those occurrences in context, one can then gain religious tolerance of adherents of these faiths even though one does not ascribe to any of them.

In Confucianism, most adherents believe that social harmony is the most important goal (Hopfe & Woodward, 2004). This school of thought was started by Confucius. He lived at a time when his society was struggling with the reinforcement of laws. Confucius thought about the ineffectiveness of coercive laws.

People simply followed them without really understanding them. This meant that the method was reactive rather than proactive. The intellectual proposed that if people internalized behaviors before acting, then they would act in an appropriate manner. In this regard, they would abide by their mutual obligations, and thus prevent the occurrence of disorder in that society.

Confucius, therefore, created the concept of mutual relationships and the need to respect one another. From this small history, one can understand why loyalty, etiquette and humanness are so important in the Confucian faith today. It was an attempt at creating social harmony by ensuring that everyone understood his place. Through education and personal effort, it was possible for people to become better.

In the Taoist school of thought, it is held that the ideal way of life is to accept things as they are. When one resists nature, then one actually causes things to get worse. It is in line with this thinking that Taoists believe in the Ying and Yang.

One represents the strong and hard force and the other represents the soft and feminine force. Therefore, by finding a balance between these forces in the universe, then calmness will prevail. The Taoist faith came after the Confucian school of thought. Confucianism taught about personal involvement and striving to become better.

However, subsequent intellectuals realized that they needed a new way of thinking that promoted greater peace and harmony. They lived at a time when there was too much active striving as seen in the warring era. Therefore, it was imperative to introduce the concept of yielding to nature. In this school of thought, it was argued that there was a force of life called Tao that flows everywhere.

One’s major goal was to be in harmony with the Tao. Through the use compassion, moderation and humiliation, one can develop important virtues. Most problems arise when one tries to fight or interfere with the Tao by acting in opposition to nature. One must strive to find answers within through meditation. The story of the emergence of Taoism demonstrates that experiences are crucial to the formation of one’s belief systems.

It was a response to the challenges of Confucianism and the social upheavals it had created. Too much active strive led to war in that community; this prompted an alternative way of thinking. Once again, one can become tolerant to this religion by realizing that it was a natural creation of the political and social problems of that time. Taoism complemented Confucianism in this society. In fact, many individuals abide by the principles of both these faiths.

They epitomize religious tolerance because they understand that belief systems carry a certain purpose in one’s society or one’s history. The same reasoning allows one to understand why Buddhism plays an important role in the Chinese society as well as many others in Asia. It is philosophical in nature and has generated minimal conflict with other faiths hence its acceptance (Keown, 1996).

Judaism, Islam, and Christianity are the three main religions that have come to be associated with Abraham monotheism. A large part of Christian scriptures have been adopted from the Jewish faith. Similarly, many parts of the Islamic faith have stories or portions from the Jewish scriptures. In order to enhance religious tolerance, it is imperative to look at the history of the formation of these faiths in order to understand why their adherents hold the beliefs that they do.

Judaism is a religion in which people believe that they have a special relationship with God. This stems from the fact that they are a chosen people, having descended from Abraham. God gave them a gift of laws called the Torah to assist in maintaining their relationship with him and with one another.

The Jews have been misunderstood by many as a ritualistic and legalistic religion as seen through their scriptures, which are called Torah (interpreted as laws). In order to negate these misunderstandings, one must understand why the Jews called their scriptures the Torah.

The Jews think of themselves as God’s special people. It is believed that in order to promote harmony with God, they needed some guidance. Also, God needed to give them a commentary on how they could act towards one another; this was the reason why he gave them the guidance of the Torah.

Therefore, one can become tolerant of this religion by understanding the origin of their ritualistic practices. Judaism is also a religion that is highly diverse. The diversity stems from some cultural and theological experiences of members of this religion. Some individuals resettled along the Mediterranean or other parts of Europe and thus created their own version of the religion.

Conversely, some individuals understood the rituals and religious practices differently. These theological differences led to the birth of reconstructionists, reform Jews, Liberal Jews, Orthodox and Conservative Jews. Therefore, a cultural dissection of the Jewish religious system allows one to understand it. In this regard, one can accept adherents of the faith based on the premise that their history and their values led them to that place.

Christianity is the most predominant faith in the world today. In the US, most citizens associate themselves with some form of Christianity. It is still necessary to understand the development of Christianity in order to foster tolerance among the various sects if one happens to be a Christian or to build tolerance for non Christians.

The Christian faith began when Jesus of Nazareth was born in Jerusalem; a Jewish community. He was regarded as the incarnation of God as he was his son. This was seen through the fulfillment of prophecy as well as his life on earth – he performed miracles and did other divine things.

After he died and resurrected, the first Christian church officially began. Therefore, for non Christians, it is possible to understand why Christians focus on Jesus; they believe that he was God living amongst men. Furthermore, Christianity is monotheistic because having such a supreme being is the only consistent way to understand what their Holy Scriptures say about nature and the universe.

Religious tolerance can be effectively promoted when one understands the experiences and the history of the people who abide by them. Hindu-Buddhism, Chinese religions and Abraham Monotheism all emanated from a series of events or encounters that shaped those faith systems.

Some issues were political such as the warring states in China and Taoism; others were social such as the need to stick to certain social structures as in Hinduism. In essence different experiences led to different conceptual frameworks hence religions. It is this statement that makes religious tolerance possible.

Esposito, J. Fasching, D. and Lewis, T. (2002). World Religions Today . Oxford: OUP

Fallows, W. (1998). Religions East and West . Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Publishers

Hopfe, M. & Woodward, R. (2004). Religions of the World . London: Pearson-Prentice hall

Keown, D. (1996). Buddhism: a very short introduction . Oxford: Oxford University press

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, June 19). Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/

"Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay." IvyPanda , 19 June 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay'. 19 June.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/.

1. IvyPanda . "Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/.

• Vedic Religion Analysis and Interpretation
• Religion Doctrines: Moksha and Salvation
• Vedic Hinduism, Classical Hinduism, and Buddhism: A Uniting Belief Systems
• Confucianism and Taoism
• Taoism: Growth of Religion
• Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism Elements
• Torah and Qur'an: The Laws and Ethical Norms
• Taoism: The Origin and Basic Beliefs
• Salvation and Self in Hinduism and Theravada Buddhism
• The Comparison of Buddhism and Taoism Philosophies
• Navigating Religious Beliefs in the Workplace
• Dr. Baxter's video lecture Response paper
• The Divine Life Church
• Role of Religion in Public Life (Church and State)
• Religion in America: Past, Present, and Future

The Quest to Cultivate Tolerance Through Education

• Published: 28 February 2023
• Volume 42 , pages 231–246, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Dan Mamlok   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3910-7169 1  

360 Accesses

Explore all metrics

This paper examines the notion of tolerance in education. In general, tolerance is perceived as a means to resist hostility, raise awareness of cultural differences, mitigate violence, and maintain liberal and democratic values. In education, there are various initiatives, such as the International Day for Tolerance (UNESCO in Declaration of principles on tolerance, 1995), that aim to build resilience against different forms of hate and cultivate openness and acceptance of the other. Yet the idea of tolerance includes different understandings and interpretations. This paper argues that cultivating an embodied sense of tolerance among students, in particular in divisive communities, requires us to move beyond deliberative interpretations of tolerance and to advance a pragmatic understanding of tolerance through an agonistic lens. This paper starts with a review of several dominant interpretations of tolerance. The heart of the paper focuses on interpreting Dewey’s pragmatism as a theoretical basis for advancing tolerance. The final part of the paper explores how pragmatism through an agonistic lens can support a more flexible and humane approach to dealing with political conflicts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Education and Toleration

Education for Tolerance

The “other is me” is an educational program in Israel that aims to raise empathy and tolerance among students.

I focus on these two approaches since they are the most influential the field of education. However, it is noteworthy that there are many other strains of agonism, which are beyond the scope of this paper’s discussion (Koutsouris et al. 2012 ).

In this paper I refer to the Palestinians who are citizens of Israel.

Abowitz, Knight, and Kathleen, and Mamlok, Dan. 2019. The case of #NeverAgainMSD: When proceduralist civics becomes public work by way of political emotion. Theory & Research in Social Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2019.1586611 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Ambrosio, John. 2019. Restoring the political: Exploring the complexities of agonistic deliberation in classrooms. A response to ‘empowering young people through conflict and conciliation: Attending to the political and agonism in democratic education.’ Democracy & Education 27 (1): 1–4.

Google Scholar  

Backer, David. I. 2019. Radical discussions: Agonistic democratic education. In Philosophy of education yearbook, 127–143. Philosophy of Education Society.

Bauman, Zygmunt. 2016. Strangers at our door . Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Bekerman, Zygmunt. 2018. The graduate(s): The harvests of Israel’s integrated multicultural bilingual education. Race, Ethnicity and Education 21 (3): 335–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1294574 .

Bernstein, Richard J. 2010. The pragmatic turn . Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Boler, Megan. 1999. Feeling power: Emotions and education . New York: Routledge.

Burwood, Les, and Ros Wyeth. 1998. Should schools promote toleration? Journal of Moral Education 27 (4): 465–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724980270402 .

Chinnery, Ann. 2005. Cold case: Reopening the file on tolerance in teaching and learning across difference. In Philosophy of education , ed. Kenneth R. Howe. Normal, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Chudoba, Ewa. 2017. What controls and what is controlled? Deweyan aesthetic experience and Shusterman’s somatic experience. Contemporary Pragmatism 14 (1): 76–92. https://doi.org/10.1163/18758185-01401005 .

Cohen, Andrew Jason. 2014. Toleration . Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Dewey, John. 1910. How we think . Boston: D.C. Heath.

Book   Google Scholar  

Dewey, John. 1916. Democracy and education . Radford, VA: Wilder Publications.

Dewey, John. 1938. Experience and education . New York: Free Press.

Dewey, John. 1939. Freedom and culture . New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons.

Dewey, John. 1930. Quality thought. In John Dewey, the later works, 1925–1953, vol. 5: 1929–1930 , ed. Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Englund, Tomas. 2016. On moral education through deliberative communication. Journal of Curriculum Studies 48 (1): 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2015.1051119 .

Forst, Rainer. 2012. Toleration in conflict: Past and present . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Glover, Robert W. 2012. Games without frontiers? Democratic engagement, agonistic pluralism and the question of exclusion. Philosophy and Social Criticism 38 (1): 81–104.

Gusacov, Eran. 2020. Concerning the question of feasibility of political-civil education: Israel as a case study. Studies in Philosophy and Education 39: 167–185.

Hess, Diana, and Paula McAvoy. 2015. The political classroom: Evidence and ethics in democratic education . New York: Routledge.

Heyd, David. 1996. Introduction. In Toleration , ed. David Heyd, 3–17. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Israeli Ministry of Education. n.d. The international day for tolerance [Hebrew]. https://edu.gov.il/noar/minhal/info/Pages/holidays/events/international-day-for-tolerance.aspx

Knight Abowitz, Kathleen. 2018. The war on public education: Agonist democracy and the fight for schools as public things. Philosophical Inquiry in Education 28 (2): 1–15.

Knight Abowitz, Kathleen, and Mamlok, Dan. 2019. The case of #NeverAgainMSD: When proceduralist civics becomes public work by way of political emotion. Theory & Research in Social Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2019.1586611

Knight Abowitz, Kathleen, and Mamlok, Dan. 2021. NeverAgainMSD student activism: Lessons for agonist political education in an age of democratic crisis. Educational Theory 70(6), https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12451

Koutsouris, George, Lauren Stentiford, Simon Benham-Clarke, and David Hall. 2021. Agonism in education: A systematic scoping review and discussion of its educational potential. Educational Review 74 (5): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.1889983 .

Langmann, Elisabet. 2021. Tolerance and education. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://oxfordre.com/education/view/ https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264093-e-1512 .

Levinson, Meira. 2012. No citizen left behind . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Lo, Jane C. 2017. Empowering young people through conflict and conciliation: Attending to the political and agonism in democratic education. Democracy & Education 25 (1): 2.

Macleod, Colin. 2010. Toleration, children and education. Educational Philosophy and Theory 42 (1): 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2008.00493.x .

Marder, Michael. 2010. Groundless existence: The political ontology of Carl Schmitt . New York: Continuum.

Mason, Lance E. 2016. Cultivating civic habits: A Deweyan analysis of the national council for the social studies position statement on guidelines for social studies teaching and learning. Education and Culture 32 (1): 87–110. https://doi.org/10.5703/educationculture.32.1.87 .

Mouffe, Chantal. 2000. Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism. Political Science Series 72: 1–17.

Mouffe, Chantal. 2013. Agonistics: Thinking the world politically . New York: Verso.

Parker, Walter. 2010. Listening to strangers: Classroom discussion in democratic education. Teachers College Record 112 (11): 2815–2832.

Quantz, Richard. 2015. Sociocultural studies in education: Critical thinking for democracy . Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

Rawls, John. 1993. Political liberalism . New York: Columbia University Press.

Rice, Suzanne. 2009. Education for toleration in an era of zero tolerance school policies: A Deweyan analysis. Educational Studies 45 (6): 556–571. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131940903338308 .

Rimon-Or, Anat, and Yossi Argaman. 2017. Ticking thought [Hebrew] . Haifa: Pardes.

Ruitenberg, Claudia. 2009. Educating political adversaries: Chantal Mouffe and radical democratic citizenship education. Studies in Philosophy and Education 28 (3): 269–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-008-9122-2 .

Stanley, Jason. 2018. How fascism works: The politics of us and them . New York: Random House.

State Comptroller and Ombudsman of Israel. 2021. Education for living together and preventing racism [Hebrew]. In Audit annual report for 2021 71: 1095–1156. https://www.mevaker.gov.il/sites/DigitalLibrary/Pages/Reports/5272-12.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

Tamir, Yuli. 2015. Teachers in the social trenches: Teaching civics in divided societies. Theory and Research in Education 13 (1): 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878514566555 .

Todd, Sharon. 2010. Living in a dissonant world: Toward an agonistic cosmopolitics for education. Studies in Philosophy & Education 29 (2): 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-009-9171-1 .

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 1995. Declaration of principles on tolerance . https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000151830

Williams, Bernard. 1996. Toleration: An impossible virtue? In Toleration , ed. David Heyd, 18–26. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Education, Tel-Aviv University, P.O. Box 39040, 6997801, Tel Aviv, Israel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Mamlok .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Mamlok, D. The Quest to Cultivate Tolerance Through Education. Stud Philos Educ 42 , 231–246 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-023-09874-8

Download citation

Accepted : 15 February 2023

Published : 28 February 2023

Issue Date : May 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-023-09874-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Democracy and education
• Citizenship education
• Political emotions
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Paper Writer Free >
• Essays Examples >
• Essay Topics >

Tolerance Essay

Type of paper: Essay

Topic: Tolerance , People , Belief , Respect , Society , Sociology , Religion , Behavior

Words: 1925

Published: 2020/12/28

Introduction If there is one problem that has plagued the human race for a long time, then it is tolerance. The human race is made up of a diverse range of individuals coming from all walks of life. These individuals espouse different characteristics, values, and beliefs. It is these differences that have often acted as an impetus for societal clashes and intolerance. Some cultural groups in the society cannot simply tolerate the values of each other. They disapprove of these cultural values and beliefs and have no qualms letting the other group know it. This then often leads to societal clashes. However, intolerance does not only occur across different cultural and social groups in the society. It can also occur between individuals in the society, some even from the same social group. This mainly occurs when one individual disapproves the other’s life choices, behaviors, attitudes, and values. Normally, intolerance is accompanied by lack of respect where individuals lose the respect they have for each other. This once again sets up a lot of individual clashes in the society. Ultimately, no one desires to see clashes in the society. The question that has therefore been asked by many philosophers is whether humans begins should exhibit tolerance towards people that they disapprove in order to show them respect or whether they should tolerate because they cannot simply bring themselves to respect them. This is indeed a contentious issue that has been explored and touched on by a relatively large number of authors. Some have explored the aspect of tolerance and what it exactly entails. Others have looked at the limits of tolerance and the situations where it is applicable and not applicable (Williams & Waldron, 2008). What emerges from all this literature is that tolerance is actually a subjective term that exhibits a lot of dynamism across different society contexts. What may, for example, be tolerable in one society may not necessarily be tolerable in another society. Tolerance also varies from one individual to the other. There are some levels of disapproval where tolerance is impossible. An individual may loathe the other so much that tolerating them is simply impossible. Alternatively, the behavior of one individual may be viewed by another so negative that once again, tolerance is impossible. The absence of tolerance can be accompanied by two specific scenarios. One, the individual who disapproves of the other’s behaviors may choose to simply walk away and never interact with that individual again (Scanlon, 2003). Simply put, the individual may cut the ties between him and the other individual completely because he simply cannot tolerate the other. In the second scenario, the individual who disapproves of the other may choose to confront them. Once again, confrontation is a subjective term. It can mean verbal confrontation or physical confrontation. Verbal confrontation is where the individual makes it known to the other why they disapprove their behavior attitude and values. Unfortunately, emotions might get high during the verbal confirmation, and this may translate to the individuals physically confronting each other by fighting. This can have disastrous effects for both parties, and they may end up injuring each other or worse still killing each other. However, the consequence for the first type of intolerance which constitutes walking away are less severe (McKinnon, 2005). In fact, some consider it be the noble thing to do when one does not approve of the other, whether it is their behavior, their attitude, their values or even their entire being. The conventional definition of tolerance is a deliberate choice to either put up or leave alone what one disapproves of dislikes when one actually has the power to react or act otherwise. It is usually a matter of degree (Scanlon, 2003). For example, one might actually leave the object or aspect of tolerance alone or one might actually choose to subject this object to ridicule criticism, pressure, social sanctions, physical force and persecution (Horton & Mendus, 1985) The issue of tolerance has in fact been debated for a long time, right from the days of John Locke who is in his famous manuscript “A Letter concerning Toleration” called for religious tolerance among various society groups of the time. Locke wrote his letter when England was cutting down its ties with the Roman Catholic Church and making Protestantism as the official religion. His principal claim in this manuscript was that the government, or the state authority should not attempt to use force in order to make citizens subscribe to a certain religion that the government considers to be the true religion (Locke, 1689). He also claimed that religious organizations and entities are voluntary in nature and, therefore, they have absolutely no right to use any form of coercive power over their member or even those who are not members. Simply put, Locke’s main arguments that force should never be used as a way of instilling beliefs to people who do not subscribe to these beliefs. In addition, people should not be persecuted for subscribing to a certain set of beliefs (Locke, 1689). Locke’s logic and model is applicable to not only the religious context but also across various other societal contexts. His logic can be interpreted as calling for respect and tolerance for the people whose beliefs are different. In fact, tolerance and respect go in hand in hand. Respect means that even if one may disagree with the belief and behaviors of the other, as long as they do not affect the being of one, the one has to respect the other. There are various things in the society that elicit tolerance and non-tolerance. As mentioned earlier, these include practices, ideologies, and beliefs, ethnic, social and religious groups among others. As it has been shown tolerance to some simply translates to putting up with. Respect, on the other hand, refers to feelings of deep admiration for an individual who has achieved something (McKinnon, 2005). This is often elicited by the achievements or the qualities of another individual.

It is, however, crucial to understand that there is indeed a huge difference between tolerance and respect.

Keen analysis reveals that tolerance alone is associated with some kind of ingenuity. People often use the term to show that they are acceptive of other cultures or values but do have any respect for them. This is a very biased approach given that in many cases, people do not actually take the time to learn why some people subscribe to certain behaviors. Members of the social liberal movement would perhaps argue that people are all the same and then being truly liberal translates to accepting that people are unique and different and that there is nothing wrong with this (Kukathas, 2003).

Being truly liberal also means respecting other people for their differences and not simply tolerating them (Kukathas, 2003).

A person can tolerate something but not welcome it. This then has the potential to make certain groups in the society or certain people in the society to feel weak and inferior. In fact, when keenly analyzed, tolerating comes off as quite disrespectful and demeaning. This is especially in regards to human beings. It may appear like it has the best intentions, but in reality, it does not and is in fact quite demeaning. The lifestyles and cultures are something to be tolerated but should instead be respected. As it has been emphasized, to say that one tolerates something brings out some form of bigotry. Tolerating is also not something final. One can tolerate something for some time, and when another time arrives, one may decide that they no longer want to tolerate that thing, and this is when conflict emerges (Heyd, 1996). Respect, on the other hand, is final. Unlike tolerance, one does not have to pretend to like or even welcome something. By respecting, it means that one acknowledges the difference in values views and beliefs and also acknowledges the right of the people to have these views. It is also means accepting that one may not be always right and that it is proper to give or provide room for other views and beliefs that may, in the long run, tend to be more accurate. Therefore, although one may not necessarily welcome the opposing views, respect means that one is mature enough to acknowledge that they exist. This becomes essential in not only comprehending a concept from several perspectives, but it also helps people to understand their own beliefs and views better (Kymlicka, 1995). For example, encountering a differing view and respecting it enables one to go back to his or her own view, gauge it with the differing view and try to assess the correctness of this view. In such a case, the answer is never definite and because of the presence of respect, one is able to leave it at that, unlike saying that one tolerates something only for this tolerance to wear off one day and for the person then to start confronting the other, perhaps even physically and then leading to unwanted results like societal clashes and injuries (McKinnon & Castiglione, 2003). John Stuart Mill is another famous philosopher who has explored the issue of tolerance. His 1869 essay “On Liberty” addresses the issue of liberty, and his logic can also be applied to other differing societal values, beliefs, and opinions. In fact, in this essay, he advocates for tolerance on not only religious differences but other aspects of life as well. Mills argues that the toleration in modern societies is actually required in order to cope with the many forms of irreconcilable social, political and cultural plurality. Mills provides three main arguments or points for toleration. In regard to the harm principle, he contends that the exercise of social or political power can only be legitimate if it is required to prevent the harming of one individual by another and not to enforce as specific idea of good or superiority in a manner that is paternalistic (Mills, 1859). His second point is that toleration towards varying opinions receives justification from the utilitarian concept or belief that both false and true opinions actually lead to social learning processes that are highly productive. The final argument brought forth by Mill is that toleration of experiments of living that are usual is in justifiable romantically because it stresses the values of originality and individuality which are natural urges in all human beings (Mills, 1859). Some may argue for example that tolerating and respecting people and ideas are two different things. For example, an argument may be brought forth that one can respect other people but when it comes to their ideas, tolerance is enough. However, double standards should not be applied. The situation can perhaps be helped by understanding that ideas do not exist on their own. They do not exist out of people’s minds and, in fact, for one to gain knowledge on differing ideas; one often has to hear them from s second person show believes in them. Therefore, it would not be proper to substantiate ideas from people and when it comes to respect, it should be applied generally to only people but to their ideas as well since they are one and the same (Kymlicka, 1995). The current society is characterized by the plurality of ideas, views and opinions on almost everything. The same society is also characterized by a host of social, cultural and political differences as well individuals’ differences between people. These differences often lead to disapproval, and when this occurs, people can either choose to tolerate or respect these differences. This essay has shown that simply tolerating, although helpful in some situations, is not as effective as respecting differing views, behaviors or values. Tolerance may wear off in the future, but respect is final and in addition to preventing conflict and social clashes, it enables persons to understand concepts from different perspectives and also analyze their own views and opinions. Therefore, respect should always take precedence over tolerance.

Scanlon, Timothy, 2003. The Difficulty of Tolerance. Essays in Political Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 187–201. Kukathas, Chandran. 2003. The Liberal Archipelago: A Theory of Diversity and Freedom, Oxford: Oxford University Press. McKinnon, Catriona. 2005. Toleration: A Critical Introduction, London & New York: Routledge. Heyd, David. 1996. Toleration: An Elusive Virtue. Princeton: Princeton University Press; Horton, John & Mendus., Susan. 1985., Aspects of Toleration: Philosophical Studies. London: Methuen. Susan Mendus., 1999. The Politics of Toleration: Tolerance and Intolerance in Modern Life. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. McKinnon, Catriona & Castiglione, Dario. 2003. The Culture of Toleration in Diverse Societies: Reasonable Toleration. Manchester & New York: Manchester University Press. Williams, Melissa S & Waldron. Jeremy. 2008. Toleration and Its Limits. New York & London: New York University Press. Locke John., 1689. A Letter Concerning Toleration. Mill, John Stuart., 1859. On Liberty. Kymlicka, Will. 1995. Multicultural Citizenship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Share with friends using:

• Example Of Research Paper On Ghosts Of Mississippi By Rob Reiners
• Example Of Turkish Settlement Patterns Ottoman City In The Balkans Essay
• Segregation Essays
• Veto Essays
• Downturn Essays
• Jeremy Bentham Essays
• Ruin Essays
• Volkswagen Essays
• Peer Pressure Essays
• Sierra Leone Essays
• Patronage Essays
• Wage Increase Essays
• Textbook Essays
• Admin Essays
• Middle School Essays
• Readiness Essays
• Comprehension Essays
• Misrepresentation Essays
• Climb Essays
• Litigation Essays
• Proctor Essays
• Subprime Essays
• Hedge Essays
• Housing Market Essays
• Latvia Essays
• Ferry Essays
• Lithuania Essays
• Ghost Essays
• Carnival Essays
• Mother In Law Essays
• Daughter In Law Essays
• Hurt Essays
• Illumination Essays
• Memorization Essays
• Cottage Essays
• Dispatch Essays
• Heir Essays
• Bad Debt Essays
• Allowance Essays
• Diary Essays
• Inclination Essays
• Digestive Essays
• Cardiovascular System Essays
• Turban Essays
• Islamophobia Essays

We use cookies to improve your experience with our site. Please accept before continuing or read our cookie policy here .

Wait, have you seen our prices?

• Website Inauguration Function.
• Vocational Placement Cell Inauguration
• Media Coverage.
• Certificate & Recommendations
• Privacy Policy
• Science Project Metric
• Social Studies 8 Class
• Computer Fundamentals
• Introduction to C++
• Programming Methodology
• Programming in C++
• Data structures
• Boolean Algebra
• Object Oriented Concepts
• Database Management Systems
• Open Source Software
• Operating System
• PHP Tutorials
• Earth Science
• Physical Science
• Sets & Functions
• Coordinate Geometry
• Mathematical Reasoning
• Statics and Probability
• Accountancy
• Business Studies
• Political Science
• English (Sr. Secondary)

Hindi (Sr. Secondary)

• Punjab (Sr. Secondary)
• Accountancy and Auditing
• Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Technology
• Automobile Technology
• Electrical Technology
• Electronics Technology
• Hotel Management and Catering Technology
• IT Application
• Marketing and Salesmanship
• Office Secretaryship
• Stenography
• Hindi Essays
• English Essays

Letter Writing

• Shorthand Dictation

Essay on “Tolerance” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.

The world needs more Tolerance

“Tolerance is the only real test of civilization”. It was Arthur Kelps who thus extolled the virtue of tolerance. Man in the 21 st century believes he is more civilized than his ancestors. But is he also more tolerant than them? Unfortunately, the virtue of tolerance is not abundant in the world of today and the world is in dire need of it.

          Tolerance can be defined as the possession of  a fair and objective perspective and attitude towards those people who are of different races, religions, nations or have a set of opinions, beliefs and ideas the differ from our own.

          The importance of tolerance lies in its ability to make a human being broad enough in mind to be receptive to all  kinds of ideas. This, in turn , enables on e to widen one’s knowledge and exercise more freedom of choice and jugement for oneself. At the same time it creates a deeper understanding of other’s views and beliefs.

          Today, tolerance seems to be at a discount at all levels. At the most trivial sign of disagreement hot words are exchanged, almost immediately escalating into a fight and sometimes even murder. Family members find it difficult to put up with one another’s shortcomings – after all which human being is perfect? Communities, social groups, facial groups and nations- at all levels, there appears to be an acute lack of tolerance. Trivial misunderstandings, even rumors, give rise to riots with the accompanying bloodshed and permanent acres on relationship ; at the national level, there is civil war and border wars. So often a personal matter such as religion has been distorted to create hatred amongst peoples. If people learnt to tolerate one another’s views , perhaps such sad occurrences could be reduced if not totally removed from this world!  

          Why has tolerance level come down? Or, indeed, has it come down at all? Human beings all through the ages have shown intolerance of views and beliefs and customs alien to their own. Wars such as the Crusades have been fought because of religious intolerance. Racial tension has grown due to intolerance. So long as human beings give in to envy, malice, jealousy and greed, tolerance will suffer. In rent times several longstanding and accepted social institution have shown signs of crumbling. Family values, social values are all being eroded. An increasing materialistic and consumer culture has not helped to nurture essential values. The individual has assumed such importance that anything that militates against that individual’s own ideas is not collated.

          Enlightenment of individual is necessary. Universal values of liberalism, the willingness to listen to others, at most agree to disagree and not enter into fights of domination – these qualities have to be bred at every level of society. Democracy, after all, means tolerance of dissent; if this tolerance is not imbibed and nurtured, it will only give rise to another Bosnia, Chechnya or Kashmir.

About evirtualguru_ajaygour

commentscomments

Nyc and thnks

No comment it is awesome.

this has almost all the information I need for my project.

thank you, e virtue guru

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Quick Links

Popular Tags

Visitors question & answer.

• Gangadhar Singh on Essay on “A Journey in a Crowded Train” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.
• Hemashree on Hindi Essay on “Charitra Bal”, “चरित्र बल” Complete Hindi Essay, Paragraph, Speech for Class 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 Students.
• S.J Roy on Letter to the editor of a daily newspaper, about the misuse and poor maintenance of a public park in your area.
• ashutosh jaju on Essay on “If there were No Sun” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.
• Unknown on Essay on “A Visit to A Hill Station” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.

Download Our Educational Android Apps

Latest Desk

• The Future of Democracy in India | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.
• Democracy Recedes as a Global Ideal | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.
• Centre-State Financial Relations | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.
• Presidential System is More Suitable to India | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.
• Sanskrit Diwas “संस्कृत दिवस” Hindi Nibandh, Essay for Class 9, 10 and 12 Students.
• Nagrik Suraksha Diwas – 6 December “नागरिक सुरक्षा दिवस – 6 दिसम्बर” Hindi Nibandh, Essay for Class 9, 10 and 12 Students.
• Jhanda Diwas – 25 November “झण्डा दिवस – 25 नवम्बर” Hindi Nibandh, Essay for Class 9, 10 and 12 Students.
• NCC Diwas – 28 November “एन.सी.सी. दिवस – 28 नवम्बर” Hindi Nibandh, Essay for Class 9, 10 and 12 Students.
• Example Letter regarding election victory.
• Example Letter regarding the award of a Ph.D.
• Example Letter regarding the birth of a child.
• Example Letter regarding going abroad.
• Letter regarding the publishing of a Novel.

Vocational Edu.

• English Shorthand Dictation “East and Dwellings” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Haryana General Sales Tax Act” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Deal with Export of Goods” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Interpreting a State Law” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.