There's been a lot of talk about tolerance in recent times. The gay rights movement says that homosexuality should be tolerated, the conservative counter-movement says that gay rights do not tolerate traditional religious beliefs. In the same way, some say that Westerners should be tolerant of Islam and South Asian culture, where others believe that openly practiced Islam is an act of intolerance against Western culture. But what does tolerance actually entail; and what is it's value?
To start off, to tolerate something, you must first object to it. I wouldn't say I tolerate Islam, because I don't think it's a bad thing. So if you have no negative opinion about a culture or practice, then the question of tolerance is irrelevant.
But if someone did think that homosexuality was wrong, or that Islam was objectionable, how would they go about tolerating it?
The first thing is not to want it banned. That's pretty crucial, for obvious reasons, so I don't need to go into further detail there.
The second thing is that you must be tolerant or encountering it in your everyday life. It is not tolerance if one is to say "I'm fine with gays, but they should never talk about their gayness or display affection in public". Neither is it tolerant to say "Muslims are fine, but they shouldn't pray in public or wear headscarves etc.". Wanting to sweep something to the sidelines, out of sight, is not the same thing as tolerance. It's not much better than wanting to stop the activity you object to altogether. In the same way, it is not intolerant simply to act according to your own beliefs. If a Muslim should act more Westernised in order to be tolerant of you, then ti would follow that you should stop eating pork in order to tolerate Muslims. It doesn't work like that.
So the other side of the discussion is how is tolerance actually valuable?
Firstly, to tolerate is to say "my opinions are not all that there is, I am only human, and I accept I may be wrong or mistaken". This is one of the most valuable things we can do as people. To claim our views to be objective fact 100% of the time is to be arrogant, exclusive, and downright ignorant. We need to accept the principle of fallibility if we are to develop at all. And this is what tolerance does, as you are admitting that just because you believe something, it doesn't mean everyone should act according to that belief.
Secondly, and similarly, tolerance is the vital first step to discussion, debate, and exploration of human knowledge and belief. As I plan on blogging about soon: all human views are valuable in some way, and they need to be considered if we are to understand the world better. I'm not saying we have to compromise what we believe for every opposing opinion, but what we do need to do is explore why people believe things that we do not, and hopefully arrive at new truths and theories about how the world works.
The end.
To start off, to tolerate something, you must first object to it. I wouldn't say I tolerate Islam, because I don't think it's a bad thing. So if you have no negative opinion about a culture or practice, then the question of tolerance is irrelevant.
But if someone did think that homosexuality was wrong, or that Islam was objectionable, how would they go about tolerating it?
The first thing is not to want it banned. That's pretty crucial, for obvious reasons, so I don't need to go into further detail there.
The second thing is that you must be tolerant or encountering it in your everyday life. It is not tolerance if one is to say "I'm fine with gays, but they should never talk about their gayness or display affection in public". Neither is it tolerant to say "Muslims are fine, but they shouldn't pray in public or wear headscarves etc.". Wanting to sweep something to the sidelines, out of sight, is not the same thing as tolerance. It's not much better than wanting to stop the activity you object to altogether. In the same way, it is not intolerant simply to act according to your own beliefs. If a Muslim should act more Westernised in order to be tolerant of you, then ti would follow that you should stop eating pork in order to tolerate Muslims. It doesn't work like that.
So the other side of the discussion is how is tolerance actually valuable?
Firstly, to tolerate is to say "my opinions are not all that there is, I am only human, and I accept I may be wrong or mistaken". This is one of the most valuable things we can do as people. To claim our views to be objective fact 100% of the time is to be arrogant, exclusive, and downright ignorant. We need to accept the principle of fallibility if we are to develop at all. And this is what tolerance does, as you are admitting that just because you believe something, it doesn't mean everyone should act according to that belief.
Secondly, and similarly, tolerance is the vital first step to discussion, debate, and exploration of human knowledge and belief. As I plan on blogging about soon: all human views are valuable in some way, and they need to be considered if we are to understand the world better. I'm not saying we have to compromise what we believe for every opposing opinion, but what we do need to do is explore why people believe things that we do not, and hopefully arrive at new truths and theories about how the world works.
The end.
No comments:
Post a Comment