During mass migration, terrorist attacks, the confrontations of the West and Islam, our ability to understand and accept another is constantly subjected to strength. What is the meaning of tolerance and whether it can measure it? We talked about this with the philosopher Romano Madera.
A frame from the cartoon “Holopopolis”, a city inhabited by a variety of animals, from huge elephants to tiny mice, which get along well together
Romano Madera – professor of moral and practical philosophy at the University of Milan, a member of the Italian and international associations of analytical Jungian psychology.
Psychologies: The phenomenon of mass immigration is already accompanied by serious problems of the coexistence of religions and cultures, therefore we are called for tolerance, not in theory, but in practice. Is there an adequate way to measure tolerance?
Romano Madera: I would say no. In my personal opinion, tolerance, tolerance should not be considered a certain abstract value. This is a peculiar form of unstable balance. The word “tolerate” is initially characterized by a negative connotation, and this negative comes from an object that we are forced to “endure”. Approximately this form of tolerance, it seems to me, exists now in relation to what is called the “Islamic threat”.
That is, the issue of tolerance is not so simple?
R. M.: If difficulties are already found between two people, of course they will be even more serious in relation to groups of people who bring their traditions and beliefs from their native countries. The difference in cultures prevents the search for common space for all. This is a very difficult matter, because each of us has an awareness of our national and cultural affiliation, so we consider it granted that our lifestyle is universal, not causing objections (if Muslims want to live with us, they must respect our rules). We are balancing between passive tolerance, experienced as weakness, supple and feeling of guilt, and purely formal tolerance. And tolerance is also the path to establishing a dialogue, which is accompanied by a clear fear of losing its cultural identity due to its own “concessions”.
Tolerance needs boundaries?
R. M.: Tolerance is a reasonable acceptance of the fact that we can resolve the changes by recognizing possible benefits in this. We can evaluate some differences and at the same time outraged due to others. Freedom is based on some undeniable values, for example, the equality of all citizens before the law, regardless of gender, nationality and religion. There is a certain risk of letting everything on its own and wave your hand: the inability to resent and indignant for some reason. There is no justification for any act of violence or a crime that violates the law guaranteeing the peaceful coexistence of civilized people. In a situation of physical or moral choice, and even just in our everyday life we behave in a similar way: we speak with those who believe or do not believe in God, but are not capable of dialogue with those who find an excuse for murder or who would like to cancelvoting right for women. Each of us has our own measure of tolerance. It is formed from what is happening around, from what we believe, from our history, our principles and values. And our idea of tolerance can change. Until we were overwhelmed by the flow of migrants, we could consider ourselves very tolerant, for example, in relation to a certain sexual behavior, and intolerant of people who, for example, smoke in public places. Now, when Muslims are asking to build a mosque or create a separate food menu for their children in our public schools, we can find that we are less tolerant, and ask ourselves with anxiety: whether teachers are obliged to wear a burden so that the appearance of their undisguised people does not bother the little onesMuslim students? Or vice versa, we may not pay attention and, by indifference or laziness, tolerate the presence of an illegal Islamic school, where tens of thousands of children go, who are taught by unitary extremist teachings of Islam.
What answers to “awkward” questions for us would you suggest?
R. M.: I would offer to delve deeper
https://theshaderoom.com/articl/a-beginners-guide-to-navigating-goldenbet-casino.html
into what is really hidden behind our (not) tolerance. The shadow accompanies each of us, and the less it invades our conscious life, the black and denser it. Take this image, proposed by the father of analytical psychology by Karl Gustav Jung, as a starting point: it is in this shadow, full of everything that we think about others, live the vital aspects of our personality, which we do not know and which excite anger in usand antipathy. As a rule, the fact that we cannot stand in other people did not find a solution to ourselves. This means that we need to work on our “shadow”: to avoid the demonization of our enemy, to resort not only to criticism, but also to self -criticism. This does not mean that we are “angrier” by others, but if we do not start with ourselves, we will be pouring out of empty.
What else can be hidden behind our tolerance?
R. M.: We can find indifference in ourselves. That we are able to wave his hand, if only we are behind us. It would not be superfluous to ask ourselves whether our tolerance is based on the fact that we need to live calmly – because tolerance suits us because it guarantees us the preservation of our lifestyle. And one more thing: in the name of tolerance, we can hide how difficult it is for us to control the conflict. In the end, tolerance is an antidote of our fear: it allows us to feel more noble and less frightened.
Tolerance can prepare the ground for respect?
R. M.: The idea of tolerance is to a greater extent in passive support of diversity as an inevitable fact that you need to reckon with. But it is also true that it represents the conquest of Western culture, which can give the life of sincere reciprocity. People do not want to be accepted and suffered;They want them to be understood and respected. French playwright Jean Coctele said: “I can’t stand it when they endure me”. Tolerance should be a certain form of transition to respect. The Muslim, putting on the Chardra, will neither inappropriate nor indecent in the event that for her this curd is her own choice, and not a categorical order.
Dispute about tolerance in history
The question of tolerance arose after bloody wars in Europe between Catholics and Protestants in 500-600. n.e. Relocation, which allows various societies of believers to practice their religion, becomes an instrument of the state with the help of which it can preserve the world between citizens. In the battle for tolerance, important differences are manifested between the fact that people consider it right, and the fact that the state may require them.
Konstantin (306–337)
“. For well -being and confidence in the state, we came to the conclusion that we approve of such a policy: that no one is deprived of the liberty to follow Christian or any other religion, since such a concession is most suitable for maintaining peace in our time. “(Milan edict)
John Lock (1632–1704)
“. Papists should not use good tolerance. After all, it is unreasonable to resolve the free departure of faith to anyone who does not recognize the fundamental beginning, that no one is allowed to pursue and oppress the other due to the fact that he disperses him in faith ”. (“Experience of Railing”, source – Locke J. Works in three volumes: t. 3. Thought, 1988.
“What is tolerance? This is the destiny of the human race. Weakness and error are the dough from which we are created. We will forgive each other our nonsense – this is how the first law of nature commands. Anyone who pursues his brother for thinking differently, only a beast. “(” Treatise on Veroterpi “)
Karl Popper (1902–1994)
“Tolerance should not be limitless. In the presence of individual personalities or their groups that put forward requirements without reciprocity, that is, being not ready to grant others the rights that they ask for themselves, we have not only the right, but the obligation to abandon tolerance ”. (“Tolerance and intellectual responsibility”)