Should We Tolerate People We Disapprove - Coursework Example

SHOULD WE TOLERATE PEOPLE WE DISAPPROVE OF IN ORDER TO SHOW THEM RESPECT, OR BECAUSE WE CANNOT BRING OURSELVES TO RESPECT THEM? By Instructor Institution Location Date Should we Tolerate People we disapprove of in Order to Show them Respect, or because we cannot Bring Ourselves to Respect Them? Introduction Tolerance denotes a social virtue as well as a political principle that promotes the coexistence of people despite them having different views. Evidently, in a pluralistic society, people hold a diverse range of views and have a conviction of leading different lifestyles. Tolerance comes into place under two distinct conditions. For one to be tolerant, he or she must disapprove of other people views or behavioural patterns. The second condition is that for an individual to be tolerant, he or she must be in a position to counteract his or her disapproval. Tolerance is exhibited by personal restraint from efforts geared towards overcoming the disapproved views. Some individuals exhibit strong tolerance in a positive manner by exhibiting understanding and respecting the views of others. However, intolerance is evident when one chooses to exhibit indifference or superiority when he or she does not agree with the views of others. Tolerance is one of the outstanding virtues promoted in the modern society, which believes in liberalism. In a liberal society, people have the right to hold a diverse range of views. Notably, disapproval is the basis of tolerance. Unlike the views of many people, tolerance is not dependent on people’s subjective dislikes. On the contrary, disapproval is a precondition for tolerance. In the modern society, tolerance is promoted as a critical political principle that can ensure that people with diverse views and religions can coexist peacefully. This paper will discuss critical theories and aspects concerning tolerance. Evidently, tolerating people whom one disapproves of is an expression of respect as will be highlighted in this paper. The term tolerance has received criticism as a term that disrespects other people’s beliefs actions and religion. Notably, opponents of tolerance believe that respect should be the right term in accepting other people’s cultures and lifestyles. Many philosophers argue that people’s races, religions, and cultures are not aspects that deserve “putting up with”. On the contrary, they are aspects that other people should learn to respect and acknowledge fully, even if they do not agree with them (Zakaras 2013, p. 84). In many cases, expressing tolerance has been interpreted negatively. Many people opine that tolerating people translates to the fact that it is impossible to respect them. Proponents of respect argue that one may disapprove of opposing views, but still be able to respect them. However, the arguments in this paper will demonstrate that expressing tolerance is an illustration of respect. The willingness to tolerate opposing views and restrain oneself from acting upon the opposition and creating conflicts is an illustration of respect (Abbey & Spinner-Halev 2013, p. 128). Therefore, tolerant individuals exhibit the virtue in an effort to demonstrate their respect for others even when they disapprove of them. For example, in the modern society, people hold diverse views concerning religion, political ideologies, sexuality, and identity. With the increasing rate of homosexuality, which many people disapprove of, tolerance becomes more critical. People have the Freedom to Disapprove of Opposing Views, but tolerate them As highlighted above, tolerance cannot exist without disapproval. Individuals only result to tolerating what they disagree with or what they clearly do not approve. In a liberal society, people should have the freedom to disapprove of views and behavioural patterns. It is only natural that some people will express disapproval towards existing laws or worldviews. A liberal society does not compel people to approve of anything that they hear. It allows people to have a different opinion on issues that matter to them. People may disapprove of the sentiments of an individual, conduct, religious and even political views. In a diverse society that promotes autonomy, it is impossible for one person to approve of all other views. In many cases, people have a valid reason for disapproving views or behavioural patterns. Therefore, the tolerance is of critical importance when disapproval exists. It is easier for people to tolerate ideologies that they approve of. However, it is a virtue for people to tolerate unapproved opinions and behaviours. In a liberal society, individuals have the power to act against views and behaviours that they do not approve. However, expression of tolerance refrains them from using their power in a manner that will disintegrate the society. Exercising tolerance has both a moral and political objective of preventing any form of strife (Baker, Randle, Carter, & Lunt 2007, p. 53). Worth noting is the fact that strife has the potential to destroy a society. In an effort to avoid conflicts, tolerance is promoted as a significant virtue. Although people have the power to trigger an opposition to the views and behaviours that they disapprove of, they choose to exhibit tolerance in order to promote societal development. Tolerance is of Critical Importance in a Pluralist Democracy Notably, the modern society reflects a pluralist democracy. In a pluralist society, individuals have the freedom to hold different religions, lifestyles, worldviews, political ideologies, and morality. In the view of many philosophers, it is impossible to avoid the diverse views in a pluralist society. As mentioned above, a pluralist democracy promoted liberalism. In this sense, individuals have the freedom to hold different views. According to liberalism, human beings are free, and the state needs to justify any restrains imposed on human beings. According to liberal philosophers, exercising individual liberty is a critical political value. For this reason, a society that qualifies to be liberal is one that allows individuals to exercise high levels of individual liberty. In more specific terms, philosophers have highlighted that a liberal society needs to promote liberal democracy by acknowledging that each person has a right to exercise individual liberty. Therefore, a person’s right to exhibit individual liberty should determine the type of laws that a government can formulate (Daǧlier & Schneider 2007, p. 129). John Stuart Mill is one of the influential philosophers who have touched on the issue of liberalism. Mill argues that an individual should exercise individual liberty as long as it does not cause any form of detriment to the society or to specific individuals. Mill went further to argue that a liberal society should be able to protect individual liberty in three critical aspects. Such a society should allow people to have freedom of thought. In this case, freedom of thought means that people can have different convictions and belief systems regarding morality, religions, and political ideologies. In addition, people should have the freedom to determine the lifestyle that impresses them. The third aspect highlighted by Mill is that a liberal society should promote people’s freedom to associate with others for different purposes as long as they approve of them. Evidently, in a pluralist society whereby each individual exercises liberty highlights the salient need for tolerance. It is evident that people in a pluralist society that promotes liberal democracy will hold different views express varying belief systems and believe in different religions. Without tolerance, conflicts will arise. In a liberal democracy, tolerance is of critical importance if people will uphold individual liberty (Dobbernack & Modood 2013, p. 89). Notably, tolerance in a liberal democracy can be accomplished through legislation and other forums that define the expression of social opinion. A liberal democracy promotes tolerance by preventing the majority from acting upon opposing views from the minority. In any case, the majority in any society has both the social and political power required to stage an opposition against views they do not approve. However, liberal democracy allows people to recognize the value of individual liberty and puts in place legislations that motivate the majority to exhibit tolerance. Although liberalism promotes debates surrounding different viewpoint, it does not allow people to exercise their power over those they do not approve. In a pluralist society, it is impossible to resolve ideological conflicts through political approaches. Tolerance is the only viable force because it is impossible to suppress the beliefs of others (Kulenović 2005, p. 134). Unlike the views of many, exhibiting tolerance only highlights that one has respect for the right of others to exercise individual liberty. Such recognition is what motivates people to exercise their liberty without causing any detriments to others. For this reason, tolerance becomes a critical aspect. Respecting other People’s Freedom of Speech is a Measure of Tolerance Every individual has a right to free speech. The freedom of speech means that it is inappropriate for the government or social authorities to censor one’s speech. In more critical terms, it means that people have the freedom to express their personal beliefs and convictions, as well as the political ideologies. In a society that promotes freedom of speech, individuals should not be afraid of public criticism when expressing their views. A society requires tolerance to promote freedom of speech. Although one may not believe in the opinions expressed, tolerance reveals that people’s opinions are respected. In any public debate, people will express different views. Allowing them to express their views freely without any form of censorship demonstrates the respect that others have for the person’s opinions. According to many philosophers, it is a true expression of a sincere tolerance (Lester & Roberts 2005, p. 28). Mill developed his argument of fallibility that promotes the freedom of speech. According to Mill, everyone is bound to fail sometimes. In accordance with the fallibility arguments, it is impossible for one to have complete knowledge of the truth surrounding morality and religion. Therefore, it is rational to give others the chance to express their views even when we disagree with them. Mill opined that censorship of opinions was an assumption that people are infallible. However, it is evident that people are highly fallible. It is natural for humans to believe that their views are more appropriate and correct. On the other hand, people are likely to believe that opposing views are wrong and mistaken. However, it is only fair to exercise tolerance by letting other express their opinions freely. Through tolerance, it becomes evident that their opinions are respected, even when they are opposing views (Terchek 2000, p. 583). Mill argued that the full development of one’s point of view requires opposing views as well as the freedom to express and challenge different views. In many instances, people are likely to disagree with the opinions expressed by others. Exhibiting tolerance by respecting their freedom of speech is a demonstration of deep respect (Moore & Walker 2011, p. 50). Tolerance Presents Intriguing Paradoxes The paradox of tolerance has its basis on the limits of what one can tolerate. Evidently, a liberal society focuses on exhibiting high levels of tolerance. However, the society cannot ignore that fact that some opinions cannot be tolerated. For example, being tolerant does not translate to promoting intolerance by failing to act upon such intolerance. Opponents of tolerance have highlighted that it is better to initiate an opposition in a bid to correct opinions that are opposed and incorrect. Communists highlight that tolerance prevents social change because people choose not to use their social power. Religious philosophers have the conviction that exhibiting tolerance denies people an opportunity for moral guidance. Some philosophers do not recognize that tolerance has its limits. For example, there have been arguments that the tolerance should also accommodate the intolerant. However, it is important to recognize that tolerance has its limits and that it does not prevent social change. It is impossible for any individual to tolerate all the opposing views (Moreno-Riano 2003, p. 111). If one tolerated the intolerance as an opposing view, then the principle of tolerance would be self-contradictory. Tolerance and Respect As mentioned above, there has been an ensuing debate on whether one should tolerate the intolerant. Evidently, some people exhibit high levels of intolerance and do not respect the fact that people have the right to exercise liberty. However, one’s intolerance should not be a bother as long as it is privately held. Notably, in the larger society, some minority cultures may promote intolerance and disregard the value of autonomy. However, imposing sanctions in such a culture would be limiting autonomy. Tolerance should promote autonomy in every sense. In many circumstances, it is easier to tolerate intolerant people as long as they do not express their intolerance openly or cause any form of detriment to the society (Nehushtan 2007, p. 248). However, there are limits to exhibiting tolerance to those who prove to be intolerant. For this reason, it is possible for one to remain tolerant of privately held intolerant views. However, with time, the intolerant views may become intolerant behaviours. In such a circumstance, it is only rational to stop exhibiting such tolerance. When one exhibits tolerance to privately held intolerant views, he or she promotes and recognizes the value of individual liberty. However, it is impossible to respect individual liberty to people who are openly intolerant and causing detriment to the society. Exhibiting tolerance requires an individual to accept others as equals. Therefore, one chooses to tolerate their opinions and belief systems, even when they are different. Intolerant people are likely to exhibit superiority hence challenging the equality of human beings. However, tolerating an individual who holds opinions that one disapproves of illustrates a measure of respect. It illustrates the fact that an individual recognizes the rights of others, especially the right of having free thought, freedom of speech, and holding the religion of one’s choice. Some philosophers have highlighted that recognizing the equality of people is of critical importance in promoting tolerance. Recognizing that other people are autonomous and that they have a right to make their own decisions and exhibit different belief systems is an illustration of tolerance. Some proponents of tolerance highlight that it is not mandatory for one to respect the choices other people make. However, it is sufficient to tolerate such choices on the basis that other people are expressing their autonomy. Being intolerant to other choices and beliefs would only translate to disrespect to their right to autonomy. Therefore, tolerating others, even when one disapproves of them is a demonstration of respect for the autonomy (Pasamonik 2004, p. 209). A Liberal Society Promotes Liberty of Conscience through Tolerance Liberty of conscience denotes one’s freedom to practice the religion of choice or to exhibit convictions about certain ethical values. Notably, one’s religious and ethical views are a direct expression of an individual’s autonomy. In a pluralist society, there are different religious beliefs and doctrines. According to Mill, human beings are highly fallible when it comes to religious truths. Through tolerance, one should appreciate the fact that other people have a right to express different religious views. Striving to convert people to one’s religion or compelling them to believe in certain doctrines shows intolerance (Rosenblith 2014, p. 600). In the modern society, people from some religions persuade others to adopt their religious beliefs. However, if the activity is to be carried out with tolerance, people must recognize that other people have a right to hold different religious beliefs. It is a demonstration of intolerance to view the religious beliefs of others as inferior. John Locke is one of the philosophers who argued against compelling others to embrace certain religions. Therefore, he promoted the value of tolerance towards the religions of others. The modern world is defined by very diverse religious beliefs. Respecting the right of others to hold different religious beliefs shows a measure of respect for their autonomy and freedom of thought (Rossi 2013, p. 249). Conclusion Evidently, tolerance is a critical aspect of any liberal society. Notably, tolerating the opposing opinions of others illustrates that one recognizes their right to exercise autonomy and liberty. Tolerance is of critical importance in preventing conflicts and allowing people to be reasonable and express their opinions freely. The value of autonomy is emphasized in a liberal democracy and tolerance exhibits respect for such autonomy. John Stuart Mill is one of the philosophers who developed arguments that promote individual liberty and tolerance. As highlighted in this paper, exhibiting tolerance is a demonstration of respect towards others. Bibliography Abbey, R, & Spinner-Halev, J 2013, Rawls, Mill, and the Puzzle of Political Liberalism, Journal of Politics, 75, 1, pp. 124-136, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Baker, S, Randle, Q, Carter, E, & Lunt, S 2007, Democratic Learning and The Sober Second Thought: The Effect of Reading John Stuart Mills Essay "On Liberty" on Tolerance for Free Speech Among Highly Religious, Politically Conservative Students, Journal of Media & Religion, 6, 1, pp. 41-61, Communication & Mass Media Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Daǧlier, Ü, & Schneider, T 2007, The Freedom of Expression in Global Perspective, Society, 44, 6, pp. 126-130, SPORTDiscus with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Dobbernack, J, & Modood, T 2013, Tolerance, Intolerance And Respect : Hard To Accept? Houndmills, Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan, 2013., OhioLINK Library Catalog – LR, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Kulenović, E 2005, Mill, Philosophical Tolerance and Tragic Choice, Politicka Misao: Croatian Political Science Review, 42, 5, pp. 127-137, Central & Eastern European Academic Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Lester, E, & Roberts, P 2005, The Distinctive Paradox of Religious Tolerance, Conference Papers -- Midwestern Political Science Association, pp. 1-30, Political Science Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Moore, H, & Walker, C 2011, Tolerance: A Concept Analysis, Journal of Theory Construction & Testing, 15, 2, pp. 48-52, Consumer Health Complete - EBSCOhost, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Moreno-Riano, G 2003, The Roots of Tolerance, Review of Politics, 65, 1, p. 111, MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Nehushtan, Y 2007, The Limits of Tolerance: A Substantive-Liberal Perspective, Ratio Juris, 20, 2, pp. 230-257, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Pasamonik, B 2004, The Paradoxes of Tolerance, Social Studies, 95, 5, pp. 206-210, Education Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Rosenblith, SB 2014, Between Mere Tolerance and Robust Respect: Mutuality as a Basis for Civic Education in Pluralist Democracies, Educational Theory, 64, 6, pp. 589-606, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Rossi, E 2013, Can tolerance be grounded in equal respect?, European Journal of Political Theory, 12, 3, pp. 240-252, Political Science Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Terchek, RJ 2000, The limits of mills tolerance, Review of Politics, 62, 3, p. 583, MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Zakaras, A 2013, A Liberal Pluralism: Isaiah Berlin and John Stuart Mill, Review of Politics, 75, 1, pp. 69-96, Political Science Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 March 2015. Read More