Article#1

Title: Toleration
Author: Andrew Fiala
Source: https://iep.utm.edu/tolerati/

The Term “Tolerance”:

In common literature the word tolerance is defined as: ”the ability or willingness to tolerate the
existence of opinions or behaviour that one dislikes or disagrees with”. More generally tolerance
is a moral and political principle grounded in the recognition of the inherent diversity of human
beliefs, values, and lifestyles within a society. It is the capacity to respect, accept, and coexist
with ideas, practices, and individuals that may differ from one's own, even when those
differences are deeply held or fundamentally divergent. At its core, tolerance reflects a
commitment to the principles of freedom, fairness, and the autonomy of individuals. It involves
the deliberate restraint of power and the willingness to engage in open dialogue,
accommodating differing perspectives while upholding the fundamental rights and dignity of all
members of a pluralistic society. Tolerance, in the abstract and philosophical sense, transcends
mere passive acceptance and embodies an active, ethical stance that fosters peaceful
coexistence, social harmony, and the pursuit of a just and inclusive society.

The essence of tolerance lies in exercising self-discipline. When we practice tolerance, we

refrain from giving in to our inclination to forcefully prohibit activities that we personally find
displeasing. In a broader context, tolerance can be interpreted as a political approach that
strives for impartiality, objectivity, or equity on the part of political actors. These concepts are
interconnected because the objective of political impartiality involves a deliberate restraint on
the authority wielded by political entities to curtail the activities of their citizens and subjects.
Associated with tolerance is the virtue of being tolerant, which can be defined as a
predisposition towards tolerance. Tolerance typically rests on the premise of valuing the
autonomy of individuals. This premise, along with the concept of tolerance, constitutes central
tenets in modern liberal theory and practice.

Analysis of Concepts:
The English terms 'tolerate,' 'toleration,' and 'tolerance' find their origins in the Latin words
'tolerare' and 'tolerantia,' which convey the ideas of enduring, suffering, bearing, and
forbearance. Additionally, there are hints of influence from Ancient Greek terminology in the
realm of philosophical contemplation on tolerance. Greek terms such as 'phoretos,' denoting
bearable or endurable, and 'phoreo,' literally signifying 'to carry,' along with 'anektikos,'
meaning bearable, sufferable, or tolerable, derived from 'anexo,' which means 'to hold up,' may
have also contributed to the development of these concepts.

Today, when we mention a person's 'high pain tolerance,' we imply their capacity to endure pain.
This common perspective sheds light on the concept of toleration and the virtue of tolerance,
emphasizing that toleration typically involves an individual tolerating something perceived as
negative. It would be unusual, for instance, to say that someone possesses a high tolerance for
pleasure.Considering this perspective, we can construct a comprehensive definition of toleration
comprising three interconnected conditions. When an individual tolerates something:
1. They form an adverse judgment concerning this thing.
2. They possess the capability to nullify or suppress this thing.
3. They consciously choose to abstain from nullification or suppression.
First Condition:
The first condition necessitates a negative judgment, encompassing disapproval, aversion, or
repulsion. This judgment encompasses emotions, dispositions, tastes, and reasoned
evaluations. This negative judgment leads the agent to potentially take adverse action against
the perceived negative thing. This Stoic view of judgment is commonly assumed in discussions
of tolerance, where proponents suggest that we can exert some voluntary control over our
negative reactions by countering them with alternative judgments. While both judgments and
emotions are considered motivating forces, they can be counteracted by different judgments,
habits, or virtues.

Second Condition:
The second condition asserts that the agent can nullify the entity. Toleration involves resisting
the urge to nullify it. To differentiate it from cowardice or lack of willpower, the agent must have
the ability to carry out their negative judgment. Toleration arises when the agent has the
potential to actively nullify or eradicate the person or object but decides not to do so.

Here, 'negate' covers a range of negative responses, such as condemnation, avoidance, or

violence. This spectrum is somewhat unclear; it's uncertain if condemnation and avoidance
equate to the same type of negation as violent acts. Regardless of this vagueness, the key
aspect of the second criterion is the ability to negate. Toleration involves restraining the power to
negate.

Third Condition:
The third condition requires the agent to consciously abstain from negating. Tolerant agents
choose not to negate what they perceive negatively. It's worth noting that toleration doesn't
equate to positive endorsement or approval.
Tolerant restraint involves a deliberate choice not to negate something based on valid reasons,
including respect for autonomy, pacifism, virtues like kindness and generosity, educational
considerations, reciprocity, and modesty regarding one's ability to judge others. Other
non-tolerant reasons may include fear, weakness of will, profit, self-interest, or arrogance.

Conclusion:
Traditionally, tolerance has been associated with respecting autonomy and educational
concerns. Both approaches often stem from a philosophical humility linked to valuing autonomy.
According to thinkers like John Stuart Mill, individuals should be free to pursue their own
well-being because they understand their needs best. However, this perspective can lead to
moral skepticism and relativism. It's crucial to understand that tolerance is a positive value, not
rooted in moral uncertainty. Advocates of tolerance believe in its goodness as it aligns with a
framework of moral values, including autonomy, peace, cooperation, and other elements
believed to promote human flourishing.