Suchergebnisse

Tolerance is an aspect of the balance between power and freedom. This contribution starts from a decision taken by the general synod of the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands, in 1914, on the issue of church members who did not recognise infant baptism. The synod decided that – on certain conditions – 'tolerance can be practiced' towards such members. This contribution analyses and evaluates this decision, with particular attention for the distinction made between fundamental and non-fundamental faith issues. It shows how this decision is related to the broader context of early twentieth century political life in the Netherlands (the 'Pacification of 1917'), and it concludes with some thoughts on the costliness of true tolerance. ; http://www.hts.org.za ; am2017 ; Church History and Church Policy

Tolerance & solidarity are recognized as key elements in the United Nations Culture of Peace Declaration. The contributions of psychology to our understanding of the causes of intolerance & the promotion of both tolerance & solidarity are discussed by drawing on insights from the Costa Rica symposium & connecting more widely with the scholarly literature in social & peace psychology. Guided by theory & research, we examine the sources of intolerance & exclusion, emphasizing not only small group processes but structural, societal-level changes. We cite provocative evidence indicating that democratization & globalization leave in their wake new divisions & intolerance. While noting the value of intergroup contact in the context of interdependent goals, we underscore the limits of traditional social psychological approaches when addressing complex social phenomena. We emphasize the critical role peace psychologists can play in exposing ideologies of oppression, & promoting social designs & practices that support tolerance & solidarity, at micro & macro levels, within the context of a collaborative, multidisciplinary framework. 52 References. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractArguments for tolerance, and criticisms of it, regularly produce paradoxes and other kinds of conceptual difficulty. We seek to show that these paradoxes are unnecessary, and that they arise from misconceptions of what a theory of tolerance is required to justify. Imagined as a "virtue," tolerance is simply confused with other concepts; understood in the framework of a theory of "rights," the element of choice essential to the concept is wholly neglected; explaining the concept in terms of some theory of fallibilism leads to a confusion of pragmatic with cognitive standards. Moreover, such mistaken approaches often arise from an equation of tolerance with liberalism or pluralism: the authors maintain, however, that justifications of tolerance do not rest on a commitment to any political theory or ideology, but imply only a recognition of the political situation itself.

The fact of Argentina being one of the first countries to legalize gay marriage has been studied all over the world. A not-so-mentioned cause is that, according to survey data, discriminatory attitudes towards homosexual people decreased noticeable in Argentina since the restoration of democracy in 1983. The evolution of these attitudes, considered as a key indicator of the value of tolerance in any society, suggests that at least some central components of political culture may change as a product of democratic exercise and not only of economic modernization. The article also revises the attitudes towards people suffering from AIDS and people with criminal records. ; Facultad de Periodismo y Comunicación Social

The relationship between values and political tolerance is complex and important for systematic research. Some researchers (P. Sniderman, 1988; J. F. Fletcher, 1990) have shown that attitudes supporting civil freedoms are rooted in the interaction of fundamental values. Our research in Croatia has shown that the support of civil freedoms (citizens' rights) depends upon increased political participation, and especially through the freedom value. While the Canadian research of J. Fletcher showed that the support for the powers of the state come from respect for the value of the community, our university students) expresses that support through respect for authority. That is an important difference that is discussed in greater length in the article. (SOI : PM: S. 55)

Tolerance underlies many contemporary controversies, yet theorists and political scientists study it in strikingly different ways. This article bridges the gap by using recent developments in political theory to enrich empirical research and extend the study of tolerance to contexts beyond liberal democracies, such as authoritarian regimes. Our recommendations challenge dominant liberal-democratic frameworks by emphasizing variation across the (1) objects of tolerance; (2) possible responses to difference; and (3) sources of tolerance. We then illustrate the promise of our recommendations with three theoretically informed experiments inspired by historical debates about religious conversion. Our results suggest a marked 'convert effect' across not only contemporary religious but also secular political divides, with the same difference in terms of content viewed as less tolerable when resulting from conversion than when given or ascribed. The research demonstrates the benefits of greater dialogue across political theory and political science, while shedding light on a central question of tolerance today.

AbstractTolerance underlies many contemporary controversies, yet theorists and political scientists study it in strikingly different ways. This article bridges the gap by using recent developments in political theory to enrich empirical research and extend the study of tolerance to contexts beyond liberal democracies, such as authoritarian regimes. Our recommendations challenge dominant liberal-democratic frameworks by emphasizing variation across the (1) objects of tolerance; (2) possible responses to difference; and (3) sources of tolerance. We then illustrate the promise of our recommendations with three theoretically informed experiments inspired by historical debates about religious conversion. Our results suggest a marked 'convert effect' across not only contemporary religious but also secular political divides, with the same difference in terms of content viewed as less tolerable when resulting from conversion than when given or ascribed. The research demonstrates the benefits of greater dialogue across political theory and political science, while shedding light on a central question of tolerance today.