intolerance essay conclusion

Beyond Intractability

The Hyper-Polarization Challenge to the Conflict Resolution Field: A Joint BI/CRQ Discussion BI and the Conflict Resolution Quarterly invite you to participate in an online exploration of what those with conflict and peacebuilding expertise can do to help defend liberal democracies and encourage them live up to their ideals.

Follow BI and the Hyper-Polarization Discussion on BI's New Substack Newsletter .

Hyper-Polarization, COVID, Racism, and the Constructive Conflict Initiative Read about (and contribute to) the  Constructive Conflict Initiative  and its associated Blog —our effort to assemble what we collectively know about how to move beyond our hyperpolarized politics and start solving society's problems. 

By Sarah Peterson

Originally published in July 2003, Current Implications added by Heidi Burgess in December, 2019

Current Implications

When Sarah wrote this essay in 2003, social media existed, but it hadn't yet become popular or widespread.  Facebook and Twitter hadn't started yet (Facebook started in 2004, Twitter in 2006.)  More .... 

What is Tolerance?

Tolerance is the appreciation of diversity and the ability to live and let others live. It is the ability to exercise a fair and objective attitude towards those whose opinions, practices, religion, nationality, and so on differ from one's own.[1] As William Ury notes, "tolerance is not just agreeing with one another or remaining indifferent in the face of injustice, but rather showing respect for the essential humanity in every person."[2]

Intolerance is the failure to appreciate and respect the practices, opinions and beliefs of another group. For instance, there is a high degree of intolerance between Israeli Jews and Palestinians who are at odds over issues of identity , security , self-determination , statehood, the right of return for refugees, the status of Jerusalem and many other issues. The result is continuing intergroup conflict and violence .

Why Does Tolerance Matter?

At a post-9/11 conference on multiculturalism in the United States, participants asked, "How can we be tolerant of those who are intolerant of us?"[3] For many, tolerating intolerance is neither acceptable nor possible.

Though tolerance may seem an impossible exercise in certain situations -- as illustrated by Hobbes in the inset box on the right -- being tolerant, nonetheless, remains key to easing hostile tensions between groups and to helping communities move past intractable conflict. That is because tolerance is integral to different groups relating to one another in a respectful and understanding way. In cases where communities have been deeply entrenched in violent conflict, being tolerant helps the affected groups endure the pain of the past and resolve their differences. In Rwanda, the Hutus and the Tutsis have tolerated a reconciliation process , which has helped them to work through their anger and resentment towards one another.

The Origins of Intolerance

In situations where conditions are economically depressed and politically charged, groups and individuals may find it hard to tolerate those that are different from them or have caused them harm. In such cases, discrimination, dehumanization, repression, and violence may occur. This can be seen in the context of Kosovo, where Kosovar Alabanians, grappling with poverty and unemployment, needed a scapegoat, and supported an aggressive Serbian attack against neighboring Bosnian Muslim and Croatian neighbors.

The Consequences of Intolerance

Intolerance will drive groups apart, creating a sense of permanent separation between them. For example, though the laws of apartheid in South Africa were abolished nine years ago, there still exists a noticeable level of personal separation between black and white South Africans, as evidenced in studies on the levels of perceived social distance between the two groups.[4] This continued racial division perpetuates the problems of intergroup resentment and hostility.

How is Intolerance Perpetuated?

Between Individuals: In the absence of their own experiences, individuals base their impressions and opinions of one another on assumptions. These assumptions can be influenced by the positive or negative beliefs of those who are either closest or most influential in their lives, including parents or other family members, colleagues, educators, and/or role models. 

In the Media: Individual attitudes are influenced by the images of other groups in the media, and the press. For instance, many Serbian communities believed that the western media portrayed a negative image of the Serbian people during the NATO bombing in Kosovo and Serbia.[5] This de-humanization may have contributed to the West's willingness to bomb Serbia. However, there are studies that suggest media images may not influence individuals in all cases. For example, a study conducted on stereotypes discovered people of specific towns in southeastern Australia did not agree with the negative stereotypes of Muslims presented in the media.[6]

In Education: There exists school curriculum and educational literature that provide biased and/or negative historical accounts of world cultures. Education or schooling based on myths can demonize and dehumanize other cultures rather than promote cultural understanding and a tolerance for diversity and differences.

What Can Be Done to Deal with Intolerance?

To encourage tolerance, parties to a conflict and third parties must remind themselves and others that tolerating tolerance is preferable to tolerating intolerance. Following are some useful strategies that may be used as tools to promote tolerance.

Intergroup Contact: There is evidence that casual intergroup contact does not necessarily reduce intergroup tensions, and may in fact exacerbate existing animosities. However, through intimate intergroup contact, groups will base their opinions of one another on personal experiences, which can reduce prejudices . Intimate intergroup contact should be sustained over a week or longer in order for it to be effective.[7]

In Dialogue: To enhance communication between both sides, dialogue mechanisms such as dialogue groups or problem solving workshops  provide opportunities for both sides to express their needs and interests. In such cases, actors engaged in the workshops or similar forums feel their concerns have been heard and recognized. Restorative justice programs such as victim-offender mediation provide this kind of opportunity as well. For instance, through victim-offender mediation, victims can ask for an apology from the offender and the offender can make restitution and ask for forgiveness.[8]

What Individuals Can Do

Individuals should continually focus on being tolerant of others in their daily lives. This involves consciously challenging the stereotypes and assumptions that they typically encounter in making decisions about others and/or working with others either in a social or a professional environment.

What the Media Can Do

The media should use positive images to promote understanding and cultural sensitivity. The more groups and individuals are exposed to positive media messages about other cultures, the less they are likely to find faults with one another -- particularly those communities who have little access to the outside world and are susceptible to what the media tells them. See the section on stereotypes  to learn more about how the media perpetuate negative images of different groups.

What the Educational System Can Do

Educators are instrumental in promoting tolerance and peaceful coexistence . For instance, schools that create a tolerant environment help young people respect and understand different cultures. In Israel, an Arab and Israeli community called Neve Shalom or Wahat Al-Salam ("Oasis of Peace") created a school designed to support inter-cultural understanding by providing children between the first and sixth grades the opportunity to learn and grow together in a tolerant environment.[9]

What Other Third Parties Can Do

Conflict transformation NGOs (non-governmental organizations) and other actors in the field of peacebuilding can offer mechanisms such as trainings to help parties to a conflict communicate better with one another. For instance, several organizations have launched a series of projects in Macedonia that aim to reduce tensions between the country's Albanian, Romani and Macedonian populations, including activities that promote democracy, ethnic tolerance, and respect for human rights.[10]

International organizations need to find ways to enshrine the principles of tolerance in policy. For instance, the United Nations has already created The Declaration of Moral Principles on Tolerance, adopted and signed in Paris by UNESCO's 185 member states on Nov. 16, 1995, which qualifies tolerance as a moral, political, and legal requirement for individuals, groups, and states.[11]

Governments also should aim to institutionalize policies of tolerance. For example, in South Africa, the Education Ministry has advocated the integration of a public school tolerance curriculum into the classroom; the curriculum promotes a holistic approach to learning . The United States government has recognized one week a year as international education week, encouraging schools, organizations, institutions, and individuals to engage in projects and exchanges to heighten global awareness of cultural differences.

The Diaspora community can also play an important role in promoting and sustaining tolerance. They can provide resources to ease tensions and affect institutional policies in a positive way. For example, Jewish, Irish, and Islamic communities have contributed to the peacebuilding effort within their places of origin from their places of residence in the United States. [12]

When Sarah wrote this essay in 2003, social media existed, but it hadn't yet become popular or widespread.  Facebook and Twitter hadn't started yet (Facebook started in 2004, Twitter in 2006.) 

In addition, while the conflict between the right and the left and the different races certainly existed in the United States, it was not nearly as escalated or polarized as it is now in 2019.  For those reasons (and others), the original version of this essay didn't discuss political or racial tolerance or intolerance in the United States.  Rather than re-writing the original essay, all of which is still valid, I have chosen to update it with these "Current Implications." 

In 2019, the intolerance between the Left and the Right in the United States has gotten extreme. Neither side is willing to accept the legitimacy of the values, beliefs, or actions of the other side, and they are not willing to tolerate those values, beliefs or actions whatsoever. That means, in essence, that they will not tolerate the people who hold those views, and are doing everything they can to disempower, delegitimize, and in some cases, dehumanize the other side.

Further, while intolerance is not new, efforts to spread and strengthen it have been greatly enhanced with the current day traditional media and social media environments: the proliferation of cable channels that allow narrowcasting to particular audiences, and Facebook and Twitter (among many others) that serve people only information that corresponds to (or even strengthens) their already biased views. The availability of such information channels both helps spread intolerance; it also makes the effects of that intolerance more harmful.

Intolerance and its correlaries (disempowerment, delegitimization, and dehumanization) are perhaps clearest on the right, as the right currently holds the U.S. presidency and controls the statehouses in many states.  This gives them more power to assert their views and disempower, delegitimize and dehumanize the other.  (Consider the growing restrictions on minority voting rights, the delegitimization of transgendered people and supporters, and the dehumanizing treatment of would-be immigrants at the southern border.) 

But the left is doing the same thing when it can.  By accusing the right of being "haters," the left delegitimizes the right's values and beliefs, many of which are not borne of animus, but rather a combination of bad information being spewed by fake news in social and regular media, and natural neurobiological tendencies which cause half of the population to be biologically more fearful, more reluctant to change, and more accepting of (and needing) a strong leader. 

Put together, such attitudes feed upon one another, causing an apparently never-ending escalation and polarization spiral of intolerance.  Efforts to build understanding and tolerance, just as described in the original article, are still much needed today both in the United States and across the world. 

The good news is that many such efforts exist.  The Bridge Alliance , for instance, is an organization of almost 100 member organizations which are working to bridge the right-left divide in the U.S.  While the Bridge Alliance doesn't use the term "tolerance" or "coexistence" in its framing " Four Principles ," they do call for U.S. leaders and the population to "work together" to meet our challenges.  "Working together" requires not only "tolerance for " and "coexistence with" the other side; it also requires respect for other people's views. That is something that many of the member organizations are trying to establish with red-blue dialogues, public fora, and other bridge-building activities.  We need much, much more of that now in 2019 if we are to be able to strengthen tolerance against the current intolerance onslaught.

One other thing we'd like to mention that was touched upon in the original article, but not explored much, is what can and should be done when the views or actions taken by the other side are so abhorent that they cannot and should not be tolerated? A subset of that question is one Sarah did pose above '"How can we be tolerant of those who are intolerant of us?"[3] For many, tolerating intolerance is neither acceptable nor possible." Sarah answers that by arguing that tolerance is beneficial--by implication, even in those situations. 

What she doesn't explicitly consider, however, is the context of the intolerance.  If one is considering the beliefs or behavior of another that doesn't affect anyone else--a personal decision to live in a particular way (such as following a particular religion for example), we would agree that tolerance is almost always beneficial, as it is more likely to lead to interpersonal trust and further understanding. 

However, if one is considering beliefs or actions of another that does affect other people--particularly actions that affect large numbers of people, then that is a different situation.  We do not tolerate policies that allow the widespread dissemination of fake news and allow foreign governments to manipulate our minds such that they can manipulate our elections.  That, in our minds is intolerable.  So too are actions that destroy the rule of law in this country; actions that threaten our democratic system.

But that doesn't mean that we should respond to intolerance in kind.  Rather, we would argue, one should respond to intolerance with respectful dissent--explaining why the intolerance is unfairly stereotyping an entire group of people; explaining why such stereotyping is both untrue and harmful; why a particular action is unacceptable because it threatens the integrity of our democratic system, explaining alternative ways of getting one's needs met. 

This can be done without attacking the people who are guilty of intolerance with direct personal attacks--calling them "haters," or shaming them for having voted a particular way.  That just hardens the other sides' intolerance. 

Still, reason-based arguments probably won't be accepted right away.  Much neuroscience research explains that emotions trump facts and that people won't change their minds when presented with alternative facts--they will just reject those facts.  But if people are presented with facts in the form of respectful discussion instead of personal attacks, that is both a factual and an emotional approach that can help de-escalate tensions and eventually allow for the development of tolerance.  Personal attacks on the intolerant will not do that.  So when Sarah asked whether one should tolerate intolerance, I would say "no, one should not." But that doesn't mean that you have to treat the intolerant person disrespectfully or "intolerantly."  Rather, model good, respectful behavior.  Model the behavior you would like them to adopt.  And use that to try to fight the intolerance, rather than simply "tolerating it." 

-- Heidi and Guy Burgess. December, 2019.

Back to Essay Top

---------------------------------------------------------

[1] The American Heritage Dictionary (New York: Dell Publishing, 1994).

[2] William Ury, Getting To Peace (New York: The Penguin Group, 1999), 127.

[3] As identified by Serge Schmemann, a New York Times columnist noted in his piece of Dec. 29, 2002, in The New York Times entitled "The Burden of Tolerance in a World of Division" that tolerance is a burden rather than a blessing in today's society.

[4] Jannie Malan, "From Exclusive Aversion to Inclusive Coexistence," Short Paper, African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes (ACCORD), Conference on Coexistence Community Consultations, Durban, South Africa, January 2003, 6.

[5] As noted by Susan Sachs, a New York Times columnist in her piece of Dec. 16, 2001, in The New York Times entitled "In One Muslim Land, an Effort to Enforce Lessons of Tolerance."

[6] Amber Hague, "Attitudes of high school students and teachers towards Muslims and Islam in a southeaster Australian community," Intercultural Education 2 (2001): 185-196.

[7] Yehuda Amir, "Contact Hypothesis in Ethnic Relations," in Weiner, Eugene, eds. The Handbook of Interethnic Coexistence (New York: The Continuing Publishing Company, 2000), 162-181.

[8] The Ukrainian Centre for Common Ground has launched a successful restorative justice project. Information available on-line at www.sfcg.org .

[9] Neve Shalom homepage [on-line]; available at www.nswas.com ; Internet.

[10] Lessons in Tolerance after Conflict.  http://www.beyondintractability.org/library/external-resource?biblio=9997

[11] "A Global Quest for Tolerance" [article on-line] (UNESCO, 1995, accessed 11 February 2003); available at http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/fight-against-discrimination/promoting-tolerance/ ; Internet.

[12] Louis Kriesberg, "Coexistence and the Reconciliation of Communal Conflicts." In Weiner, Eugene, eds. The Handbook of Interethnic Coexistence (New York: The Continuing Publishing Company, 2000), 182-198.

Use the following to cite this article: Peterson, Sarah. "Tolerance." Beyond Intractability . Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: July 2003 < http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/tolerance >.

Additional Resources

The intractable conflict challenge.

Our inability to constructively handle intractable conflict is the most serious, and the most neglected, problem facing humanity. Solving today's tough problems depends upon finding better ways of dealing with these conflicts.   More...

Selected Recent BI Posts Including Hyper-Polarization Posts

• Massively Parallel Peace and Democracy Building Roles - Part 2 -- The first of two posts explaining the actor roles needed for a massively parallel peacebuilding/democracy building effort to work, which combined with an earlier post on strategy roles, makes up the current MPP role list.
• Lorelei Kelly on Strengthening Democracy at the Top and the Bottom -- Lorelei Kelly describes the work of the bipartisan Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress which passed 202 recommendations, many unanimously. Over 1/2 have been implemented and most others are in progress.
• Massively Parallel Peace and Democracy Building Links for the Week of March 24, 2024 -- A rename of our regular "colleague and context links" to highlight how these readings and the activities they describe all fit within our "massively parallel" peace and democracy building framework--or show why it is needed.

Get the Newsletter Check Out Our Quick Start Guide

Educators Consider a low-cost BI-based custom text .

Constructive Conflict Initiative

Join Us in calling for a dramatic expansion of efforts to limit the destructiveness of intractable conflict.

Things You Can Do to Help Ideas

Practical things we can all do to limit the destructive conflicts threatening our future.

Conflict Frontiers

A free, open, online seminar exploring new approaches for addressing difficult and intractable conflicts. Major topic areas include:

Scale, Complexity, & Intractability

Massively Parallel Peacebuilding

Authoritarian Populism

Constructive Confrontation

Conflict Fundamentals

An look at to the fundamental building blocks of the peace and conflict field covering both “tractable” and intractable conflict.

Beyond Intractability / CRInfo Knowledge Base

Home / Browse | Essays | Search | About

BI in Context

Links to thought-provoking articles exploring the larger, societal dimension of intractability.

Colleague Activities

Information about interesting conflict and peacebuilding efforts.

Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Beyond Intractability or the Conflict Information Consortium.

Beyond Intractability 

Unless otherwise noted on individual pages, all content is... Copyright © 2003-2022 The Beyond Intractability Project c/o the Conflict Information Consortium All rights reserved. Content may not be reproduced without prior written permission.

Guidelines for Using Beyond Intractability resources.

Citing Beyond Intractability resources.

Photo Credits for Homepage, Sidebars, and Landing Pages

Contact Beyond Intractability    Privacy Policy The Beyond Intractability Knowledge Base Project  Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess , Co-Directors and Editors  c/o  Conflict Information Consortium Mailing Address: Beyond Intractability, #1188, 1601 29th St. Suite 1292, Boulder CO 80301, USA Contact Form

Powered by  Drupal

production_1

You may opt out or contact us anytime.

Zócalo Podcasts

Why Tolerate Intolerance?

It’s easy to cancel political opponents with harmful views—it’s also dangerous to democracy.

Crop of Jean Dubuffet’s “ Houle du virtuel ” (“ Swell of the Virtual” ) (1963). Courtesy of Flickr/jean louis mazieres.

by TAYLOR DOTSON | November 15, 2021

Is it better to tolerate seemingly prejudiced political opinions, or should we be intolerant of people whose views on diversity, equity, and identity strike us as harmful?

I am an advocate for radically tolerating political disagreement, even if that disagreement strikes us as unmoored from facts or common sense. One reason is that dissent makes democracy more intelligent. While many believe that vaccine skeptics misunderstand the relevant science and threaten public health, their opposition to vaccines nevertheless draws attention to chronic problems within our medical system: financial conflicts of interest, racism and sexism, and other legitimate reasons for mistrust. People should have their voices heard because politics shapes the things citizens care about , not just the things they know .

Tolerating disagreement also ensures the practice of democracy. Otherwise, we may find ourselves handing off ever more political control to experts and bureaucrats. Political truths can motivate fanaticism. Whether it is “follow the science” or “commonsense conservatism,” the belief that policy must actualize one’s own view of reality divides the world into “enlightened” good guys and ignorant enemies who just need to go away.

But what about beliefs that seem harmful and intolerant? You might question , as the political philosopher Jonathan Marks does, whether a zealous belief in the idea “that all men are created equal” is so problematic. Why not divide the political world into citizens who believe in equality and harmfully ignorant people to be ignored? The trouble is that doing so makes actually achieving equality more difficult.

Marks’ challenge to divide ourselves around equality makes me think of the great 20th century Austrian-British philosopher Karl Popper’s “Paradox of Tolerance,” or at least the meme version of it. This edition of the paradox holds that tolerating the openly intolerant leads to the destruction of tolerant people and tolerance. While the meme depicts the literal Nazis, it is less clear who else it should apply to. Should it extend to dangerous misinformation from right-wing politicians?

Popper’s actual writing departs from its depiction on social media. He argued for the suppression of intolerant ideas only if those speaking them were not willing to engage in rational argument, if their followers “answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.” The philosopher’s tolerance was less about combating internalized prejudice than the willingness to practice democracy.

The underlying issue when it comes to tolerance in the public square is the tension between liberalism and democracy. Although liberalism is often equated with leftism, liberal philosophy is far more encompassing. Right-wing liberals champion property and business rights, while left liberals see inclusion and equal outcomes as more important.

Liberalism often conflicts with democracy, because each proposes a different way to protect rights and ensure equality. Democratic solutions seek to broaden public participation and diversify the representation of interests in the policy process, while liberalism’s answer is to protect rights by guarding them from legislative debate. The U.S. Supreme Court, for instance, is thought to be a more reliable steward of the rights of Americans to free speech, abortion, and firearms, because justices are presumed to be far wiser, more virtuous, and less “political” than voters and representatives.

Such liberal guardianship is dominant in left-wing politics. Boston University professor Ibram X. Kendi has advocated for a constitutional amendment establishing a “Department of Anti-Racism,” an expert body with the power to review and veto legislation that seems poised to exacerbate racially unequal outcomes. For instance, if new zoning laws in New York City seemed likely to decrease rates of Black homeownership, this agency could intervene to prevent their passing.

“No-platforming,” the effort to prevent controversial speakers from presenting their views, seems far removed from judicial and expert bodies, but it guards rights in a similar way. Take Charles Murray, whose book The Bell Curve partly attributed the racial achievement gap to genetic inheritance. When a student club invited him to Middlebury College in 2017, the chants and yells of protestors prevented him from publicly speaking. A group of students justified this in light of Murray’s views not merely being factually dubious but also “[denying] the basic equality” of audience members. No-platforming posits that some ideas harm people’s rights, even if not directly inciting violence or the loss of political freedoms, and that an audience knowledgeable about these harms can prevent people from speaking in order to momentarily safeguard equality.

Karl Popper would find Kendi’s proposal, no-platforming, and perhaps even the Supreme Court inconsistent with open societies. They all rely on the idea that people with certain authoritative knowledge ought to be allowed to constrain democratic practices, whether in legislatures or briefly within an auditorium. They presume that some matters are too important to be decided, or even discussed, by unenlightened citizens and their representatives.

The work of German American philosopher Herbert Marcuse offers another, more contextual way of looking at the question. He argued that “the function and value of tolerance depend on the equality prevalent in the society in which tolerance is practiced.”

Abstract tolerance is a good thing, contended Marcuse, but it falls short in practice. The first reason was that citizens are “manipulated and indoctrinated” and lack “authentic information” and the ability to think “autonomously.” The second reason was that media, educational, and other social institutions are hopelessly monopolized by conservative thought, blocking change. Because tolerance really just “[served] the cause of oppression” in the absence of equality, Marcuse advocated “new and rigid restrictions” and “the withdrawal of toleration of speech” to restore “freedom of thought.”

While there is no doubt that citizens ought to be more often challenged to rethink the status quo, Marcuse proposed an extreme version of liberal guardianship: an “educational dictatorship,” a class of people, namely Marcuse and those who agreed with him, who can think rationally and autonomously.

Despite the democratic deficits of such a regime, it is strikingly close to what we hear from establishment voices today. After all, the presumption that some people disagree only because they are misinformed, if not completely deluded, is at the core of our current political predicament. Just consider the public controversy over how schools should teach students about race. One side claims that parental concerns over the influence of “critical race theory” on education are steeped in myth and misinformation, while the other side accuses schools of peddling “indoctrination in ahistorical nonsense.”

Such statements fail to account for a very important historical fact: it has often taken civil disobedience, from groups of citizens drawing attention to a state of affairs they believe is no longer tolerable, to break the monopolistic grip of status quo thinking. Whether it is via teachers introducing challenging ideas into the classroom or via parents pushing against school boards and teachers’ unions appearing to overstep their authority, disobedience drives political change. But liberal guardianship seeks to establish new monopolies, rather than to promote productive disagreement. That’s the dynamic in media and higher education today, where “no-platforming” is aimed at out-of-fashion political thought.

Still, no-platforming is appealing in part because political progress in addressing inequality is so frustratingly slow. Charles Murray’s racial ideas rightfully feel menacing, because they might justify even less representation of Black people in politics and higher education . Liberal guardianship looks attractive when democracy is dysfunctional, as a way to compensate for the persistence of social inequalities, not to mention ineffectual governance. Perhaps those shouting down their opponents hope that loudly opposing problematic utterances within social media and on college campuses will lead to chronic diversity issues finally being resolved. But it hasn’t worked that way.

We are seeing, right now, that liberal “thought guardianship” leads to a winnowing in the range of acceptable opinions. Each side becomes fanaticized around their own notion of justice, and public conversation becomes narrowly focused on policing the boundaries of heresy. The problem of institutions falling short of realizing equal treatment gets blurred with the issue of too many citizens thinking and saying the wrong things.

The political philosopher Robert Talisse, a Vanderbilt professor, articulates a similar concern. A consequence of ongoing political polarization is people’s partisan identities becoming core to their sense of self. In turn, they demand more conformity of belief from friends and allies.

One could call this “intolerance creep.” Efforts that begin with no-platforming more obvious opponents of equality like Charles Murray later target potential allies. For instance, geoscience professor Dorian Abbot’s recent disinvitation from speaking at MIT was not because he opposed addressing diversity problems at universities but because he believes that affirmative action is the wrong tool to use.

One problem with intolerance creep is that a range of views on equality are compatible with democracy. Philosophical debates about equality of opportunity, outcomes, status, and capabilities have persisted for centuries, with no signs of forthcoming agreement. But when citizens embrace their own version as Truth, partial allies become political enemies. The variegated, “big tent” coalitions that traditionally helped to end harmful and discriminatory politics are rendered impossible. Polarized politics leads to gridlock, not victory.

How can we avoid intolerance creep? Consider the starkly polarized debate over trans rights. Progressives’ political goal seems clear: equal treatment. Yet the conversation is dominated by ontological claims. “Trans men are men” and “Trans women are women,” insists the ACLU when issues like restroom access arise, while opponents chant “sex is real” in response. Each side is only further fanaticized by the belief that “science” vindicates their own position, as if we could just get citizens to accept certain facts, certain truths , then the thorny policy disagreements will disappear.

Some parts of the debate are not spectacularly complicated, even if they are contentious. For instance, which currently sex-segregated spaces should allow trans people entrance without intrusive forms of questioning? In other cases, discerning equal treatment is less clear-cut. Controversy over sports participation and hormone treatments for minors are beset with overlapping dilemmas and trade-offs concerning autonomy and fairness, largely obscured by competing ontological claims. For instance, a “sex realist” approach gets natal women kicked out of the Olympics, while extending transition rights to teens would mean being willing to use governmental authority to revoke parental custody. Again, politics is a matter of caring, not knowing.

This might seem like a pedantic distinction, but it’s important. As Popper wrote, “‘Equality before the law’ is not a fact but a political demand based upon a moral decision , and it is quite independent of the theory—which is probably false—that ‘all men are born equal.’” Citizens need not believe anything specific about the nature of equality or that transwomen are women. They only need to be willing to listen to people’s reasons for caring about an issue, to share their own experiences, and to make policy compromises and concessions. And studies of political canvassing show that this kind of democratic talk actually works for trans rights issues.

This looked to be the approach Nancy Kelley hoped to take when appointed chief executive of Stonewall, the LGBTQ+ human rights organization. “We don’t have to convert everybody to our way of understanding gender,” Kelley said in an interview, “for the experience of trans people’s lives to be more positive, and for them to have lower levels of hate crime, better access to health services and more inclusive schools and workplaces, we don’t need people to agree on what constitutes womanhood.”

A society that tolerates political disagreement invariably tolerates some risk of harmfully intolerant beliefs. But dissent isn’t just some abstract democratic value. As a buffer against intolerance creep, it helps ensure progress against harmful policies. We tolerate some of the opinions that strike us as distasteful because it pays off later.

So, we should resist the impulse to demand conformity in order to compensate for current democratic deficiencies. People whose speech directly promotes or inspires violence should be prevented from entering politics, but extending that intolerance to those who simply see equality differently deprives us of potential allies. As uncomfortable as it may be to talk to people whose beliefs fall short of our own, it is a discomfort that I hope more of us can learn to live with.

Send A Letter To the Editors

Please tell us your thoughts. Include your name and daytime phone number, and a link to the article you’re responding to. We may edit your letter for length and clarity and publish it on our site.

(Optional) Attach an image to your letter. Jpeg, PNG or GIF accepted, 1MB maximum.

By continuing to use our website, you agree to our privacy and cookie policy . Zócalo wants to hear from you. Please take our survey !-->

Get More Zócalo

No paywall. No ads. No partisan hacks. Ideas journalism with a head and a heart.

Herbert Marcuse

Repressive tolerance (full text).

• ☀ NCERT Books
• ☀ AP SCERT Books
• ☀ GSEB Books
• ☀ TS SCERT Books
• ☀ Board Syllabus
• ☀ Board Time Tables
• ☀ Board Hall Tickets
• ☀ Board Results
• Board Result
• Board Time Table
• Board Hall Ticket
• Board Syllabus

• Social issues

Essay on Intolerance for Students and Children | PDF Download

What is Intolerance? Intolerance indicates hesitation to respect people who belong to different religions or caste, especially minority group people. Intolerance in a country can lead to fights, increase the crime rate, and a pause to the countries development, etc. Intolerance will start through culture, religion, caste, creed, and many unaccepted beliefs. As the previous points similarly the below essay on Intolerance was described with key points. The below essay on Intolerance in India was included with effects caused on the people and the country’s development.

Short Essay on Intolerance in 250 words

Intolerance is a state of Unwillingness to take or respect the beliefs, practices, ideas related to other religions, caste, nationalities. This Intolerance can lead to violence between people of different caste and religions. The higher caste people will start discriminating against the lower caste, minority group people. Intolerance makes people’s minds not allow them to live united, freely and breaks the social rights of the people. In the olden days of India, there was religious Intolerance which leads to fighting between Pakistan and India. In the present day also the Intolerance can be seen in a few areas in some states and mainly covered in the villages.

Intolerance changes the mindset of people to live with people who belong to the same caste or religion. As the people develop the Intolerance in the society which can make the country to divide into parts. Intolerance makes people cannot work or live in a society with freedom. In the history of India, many rules were developed against intolerance in the kingdom, by killing or punishing the people of different regions, lower caste. The country to run under democracy, the government to maintain tolerance in the people of the country and people should be educated to move towards a tolerant direction . If Intolerance was seen in a country, that country cannot see the development, literacy, all the people unable to get essential things, etc. So people should maintain compassion towards the religions, faiths, traditions, trust of all the people in the country.

Long Essay on Intolerance in 500 words 

Intolerance is a state that will not accept the people’s beliefs, faiths of other caste or religions. Intolerance was still active in various parts of the world in many countries. Some countries maintain nationality intolerance, whereas these countries cannot combine with the other nationality people and start discriminatin g against them. In the past, a huge number of countries and their people adopted intolerance which may lead to wars and dividing of the kingdoms and ruling. The best example of Intolerance in Indian History is diving in India and Pakistan, where a large number of people died.

Intolerance separates the individual living in society and further results in the division of the country. It makes people and society without freedom for all people. The discrimination between the people and all religions will arise and result in fights, wars, and death to a large number of people. If the democracy needs to run without hurdles the Intolerance should not present in the people’s minds. The government should think about their people’s imagination and should motivate the people accordingly to live in peace. Every country’s government has a major role in the present modern days of the world. All the acts, laws should not hurt any caste and religious feelings and beliefs. The government should work with all the religions and caste and should only consider their economical efficiency.

The intolerance was growing among the youth in the present days of the world. All the countries are working with nationality intolerance, which provides all the opportunities in the country to their nationality people. As the countries themselves develop intolerance among the people can lead to the development of the country. By national intolerance, the people cannot move into the country for their needs and help the country. In the present days the unemployment is increasing day by day, the people in their countries demanding the government to bring the policies and other gains to their nationality people only. Thus the youth also follow the intolerance with the other people. Thus the youth think further and can attempt crimes on other people. The education in the country will not move further and finally, it leads to the downfall of the country in every race.

Social Intolerance was present in the olden days in India. B.R Ambedkar’s life was the best example of Social intolerance . Low caste people are not allowed in any activities like schooling, enjoyment, they just have to live slavery under the high caste people. Social Intolerance means breaking human rights and no freedom for people to live in society. The conclusion for Essay on Intolerance is it will not make the path for the peaceful and successful life of the people. All religious leaders should teach their people to make a united society and think in a positive direction. All people should inculcate tolerance in their daily life and respect every person. Tolerance can make the country to be united and on the other side, intolerance will break the country and can lead to huge lives losses for the country.

Quotes on Intolerance in English

• Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice.
• Tolerance of intolerance enables oppression
• Tolerance is not a synonym of Weakness
• Intolerance is evidence of impotence.
• Anger and intolerance are the enemies of correct understanding.
• Intemperance and intolerance serve no one and hatred guarantees failure.
• Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.
• To know a person’s religion we need not listen to his profession of faith but must find his brand of intolerance.
• The devil loves nothing better than the intolerance of reformers.
• We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

Intolerance: Images

We believe that the above essays on Intolerance will help you know the pros and cons of Intolerance in India and the world. The unique information will help you to enhance the essay in competitions, exams like UPSC, SSC .

Intolerance essay

Intolerance in any form is dangerous and unacceptable on the background of the growing power of modern means of destruction. The danger of intolerance has increased not due to the reason that it has become much more common, but because its representatives have received more destructive tools to implement their aggressive plans.

Taking advantage of the spread of “political correctness”, intolerant society groups have moved into an aggressive attack. This is expressed, for example, in the strengthening of fundamentalism in the Arab riots in France, in an aggressive and arrogant behavior of intolerant minorities in many countries, in the moral asymmetry, when the Chechens are allowed to destroy the Russian population in Chechnya, and the Arabs may require the destruction of Israel, the Albanians may kill the Serbs, but a very limited power respond to this is subjected to sharp criticism. Further, we will summarize and analyze the articles of Jennifer Coleman and Iolo Madoc-Jones, devoted to religious and racial intolerance correspondently, and will demonstrate the examples of intolerance existing in the society of India and the UK.

Religious Intolerance in India

In her article “Authoring (in)Authenticity, Regulating Religious Tolerance: The Implications of Anti-Conversion Legislation for Indian Secularism”, Jennifer Coleman studies the politicization of conversion discourses in modern India, concentrating on the growing support of anti-conversion law at the level of separate states.

Already in 1977, the Indian Supreme Court stated that the Constitution includes no right to turn another person into one’s faith. The statistics runs that in 2000, 626 inter-religious clashes occurred in India, in which 207 people were killed and 2,065 were wounded. In India, religious strife is not a new phenomenon, but previously, the relationship of Muslims and Hindus had been the most acute. During the last ten years, in Jammu and Kashmir regions, which are equally claimed by both India and Pakistan, more than 60 000 people were killed (Coleman 245-77).

Starting from 1998, radical Hindu groups have constantly been carrying out acts of violence. On their account, in particular, is the destruction of West India churches on Christmas of 2000, as well as the murder of Australian missionary in January 2001. In August – September 2008, the representatives of Hinduism once again showed their true demonic appearance and burned, hanged, and raped the Christians, burned Christian churches, monasteries and homes of the faithful, and all this happened in full inaction by the authorities and the police, even worse – the police themselves were engaged in violence (Coleman 245-77).

While the bills for Freedom of Religion claim to present the force of the Hindu nationalism, these laws indicate Hindutva’s political mobility as a symbolic discourse and the practical borders of its implementation in Indian legislation. However, this revival emphasizes the durability of issues concerning the feature of conversion as a person’s and society’s right, just as resuming the continuous debate over the line between propagation and conversion (Coleman 245-77).

Generally, the author states that, while conversion policy remains an influential point of reference in discussions of the religious freedom essence and quality as a distinct right of Indian nationality and democracy, the common harmful consequences of the implementation of this bill are still evident. Apart from that, the gender policy plays a decisive role in these disputes; this issue should in no way be ignored taking into account the way the anti-conversion discussion unfolds (Coleman 245-77).

Thus, the article examines the way how the bill for Freedom of Religion impacts the essence and substance of the project of Indian secularism. The author pays particular attention to how the legislations influence the perception of freedom of religion as freedom of consciousness, as well the meaning of gender issue in this dispute. Ultimately, the gap between the “religious” nature of the law in theory and its disputed effect in practice shows that the Indian secular project is trying to compromise with religious intolerance rather than completely submitting to the Hindutva politics.

The abovementioned facts show that till present moment, not peacefulness and tolerance, but extreme religious intolerance in India is a characteristic feature of modern Hinduism.

Racial Intolerance among the UK Youth

In the conditions of growing criminal justice movement intended to stop racist intolerance, the article of Iolo Madoc-Jones “Challenging and changing racist attitudes and behaviour in young people” explores the efficiency of projects designed to oppose and correct the attitudes of youth aged 11–21 to ethnic and racial groups. The article is actually an analytical report on the 2005 study of Joseph Lemos, presenting the opinions of more than 600 young people from the all over UK regarding their dislikes in people, collected by individual interviews, focus groups, and questionnaires (Lemos). The majority of the interviewed young people during the survey did not express any negative attitude towards various groups. However, a substantial minority reported their hostility to other racial and ethnic communities (Madoc-Jones 80-81).

Asians and Muslims, along with Iraqis and Afghanis, are frequently perceived by young people as potential terrorists after the 9/11 attacks on the U.S. in 2001, as well as Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The continuous speculations and political disputes might have influenced the opinion of young people just as strongly as the conflicts themselves. Some young people also treat as potential terrorists or hijackers asylum seekers and refugees. These groups are sometimes believed to get preferential treatment (Madoc-Jones 80-81; Lemos).

There is strong conviction among certain groups of young people that minor ethnic groups have no right to live in Britain and therefore should be deported to their own countries. This position is explained by the fear that the UK might become overpowered by minor ethnic communities. Some also accuse them of breaching the commonly accepted social and legal rules and norms. Some also argue that it is minority ethnic groups who are aggressive and hostile, not vice versa. Concerning the Asian people in particular, some young people believe them to disdain white people (Madoc-Jones 80-81; Lemos).

The study also shows that some young people dislike other people simply because they are different. Stereotypically, black Caribbean groups are still believed to have criminal inclinations by some young people. Perhaps for these reasons, many young representatives of black and minority ethnic communities consider many white people to be are vicious, egotistical and racist (Madoc-Jones 80-81).

A conducted poll also showed that 39% of the surveyed British prefer to live in an area with the same or similar ethnic group to which they belong themselves. 41% of white and 26% of the representative of minority reported that representatives of different races should live separately. At the same time, it turned out that the UK youth is more democratic than their parents’ generation. Only 40% of adults expressed a desire to live separately from other ethnic groups, while among young people the readiness to live in areas with mixed contingent was up to 64% (Lemos).

Researchers are very concerned about the trend of growth of racist moods in the society and the fact that respondents are not shy expressing their opinions, which was not marked previously. For example, ten years ago, only 10% of Britons considered the problem of immigrants to be one of the most important and disturbing. Now, 29% of the population is concerned about this issue and find it the biggest problem. In general, the British feel that the severity of this issue put it in third place, forwarded by educational issues (33%) and healthcare (41%) (Lemos).

In the relationships between tolerant and intolerant societies (or tolerant and intolerant cultures), there is always a possibility of violent destruction of the tolerant society by the intolerant one. The reverse process almost never takes place, because the tolerant society, by definition, does not violently destroy other people’s culture.

Tolerance gives only one advantage: it allows creating more complex and more developed society, and developing steadily. Such a society has more power, and in the classic military conflict defeats intolerant societies. Therefore, intolerant societies now do not use the tactics of open military aggression, but apply demographic penetration, which we’ve tried to see in the presented articles.

The question is how to combine humanism and the necessity of protecting modern society from the aggressive manifestations of fundamentalism, traditionalism, etc. To do this, the today’s society needs to save the only kind of intolerance: intolerance towards intolerance, which is manifested, for example, in a ban on incitement to destroy or discriminate people basing on their race, nationality, social status, beliefs, etc. Intolerance towards intolerance means that the right to freedom is placed above the right to follow traditions.

The Patriot essay

Essay on apoptosis, writing help.

Our Benefits

• Professional Writers
• Plagiarism Free papers
• Friendly Customer Support
• Reasonable Prices

Free Extras

• Plagiarism FREE Papers
• FREE Title Page
• FREE Bibliography
• FREE Formatting
• FREE Delivery

Service Features

• Custom Written
• Fully Referenced
• 300 Words per Page
• Any Citation Style
• 12 point Courier New Font
• Double spacing

LEGAL NOTICE

Custom papers you get from our writing experts should be used for research purposes only. These papers are not supposed to be submitted for academic credit.

• Writing Services
• Essay Samples
• Essay Types
• Terms of Services
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Testimonials

Essay On Tolerance

Introduction: Tolerance can be defined as a fair and aim attitude towards those whose lifestyle differs from ours. It is a noble virtue. It is wanted everywhere. It is the virtue that helps us put up with those who have different ways and opinions, and outlooks in life. It also enables us to judge the other sides of things with patience, without losing temper.

In the past, the difference in religion led to prosecution, the difference in politics led to bad-blood and difference in opinions ended in blows. Tolerance is a virtue much needed in our turbulent world. But we must recognize that there is a difference between tolerance and tolerate.

A Social Virtue of Tolerance: Tolerance is the reflection of one’s own behavior and character. The level of tolerance varies from person to person and as per the situation. People have zero tolerance for injustice and violation of the rights. If we want humanity to flourish, then we need to practice tolerance from all walks of life. As tolerance is the spirit of humanity.

Tolerance is not only an abstract virtue but also considerable influence in the current affairs of life. Man, being a social being, has to live in a spirit of harmony and co-operation with others in society. In such a process, give and take is a necessary capacity for compromise.

We cannot persuade others unless we ourselves are at the same time ready to be persuaded by practicing sweet and reasonableness. It is thus seen that tolerance is a social virtue that is opposed to dogmatism, and dictatorship in society compromise time anus is seen. It is impossible to be tolerant if one is hide-bound and rigid in views of full of prejudices.

Real Meaning of Tolerance: Tolerance does not mean to come up against any fundamental principle. Our best self goes down if we tolerate evil. In matters relating to deeper questions and principles of life, it is our duty to stand up for them and refuse an easy compromise. But tolerance does not mean to bear up moral degradation, public nuisance acts, anti-social activities, moral corruption, wrong-doing, exploitation, and deception.

Tolerance involves both humility and meekness, engaging them to say, “I am not perfect, and I am not going to try to make this imperfect soul’s walk harder through my imperfection.”

A tolerant person does not tolerate political and financial dishonesty. But in our personal life and daily dealings, we shall have to belong bearing. Tolerance does not mean to encourage a weak-kneed attitude to life. It has a limit and beyond that, it may become a social crime. Tolerance is a virtue in the simple affairs of life.

Intolerance: Intolerance is quite opposite to it. Thousands of men and women were burnt for the difference in religion. Even today, purges of political opinions have not yet been banished from society. Intolerance comes from bigotry, narrowness, prejudice, and blind self-concept.

The Necessity of Tolerance: The world has not been set to one pattern nor have men been shaped in a single mold. It is essential to pull together with all in society. It helps a man win people’s minds and earn popularity with people. The difference in the environment or condition of life causes a difference in temperament and opinion. A historical revolution has to lead diversities in outlook. Heredity is a factor not to be overlooked.

Each distinctive overlook has its own background. A cultured person takes this into account, makes allowance for them and is ready to make concessions and compromise. Without this broad-mindedness, energy may get wasted in the futile argument. In this long run, mere passion never tends to any good nor solves any problem; passion has to be controlled and disciplined by reason and tolerance.

But as education has spread, the spirit of reason has tended to prevail and the vice of intolerance has fairly diminished. With the passage of time, we are becoming more ready to recognize the possibility of views than our own. We also look upon tolerance as a mark of education and superior culture of ethics of the polite society. All great men were tolerant. They learned it from their boyhood and practical life. The Holy Scripture says, “God loves him who is tolerant.”

Unfortunately, anarchism and intolerance seem to be on the upgrade of late. Extremists with the help of sophisticated military weapons are seeking to destabilize a country, taking a heavy toll of innocent lives. Angry young man, challenging all established norms, now parades the walks of life. Tolerance has been cast to the wilds by them. Our aim should be to tackle them with a strong hand and then, of permissible, bring them to the conference table.

Our duty of Tolerance: John Stuart Mill wrote: “If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”

Tolerance is entertained everywhere. It is not a question that we should either be tolerant or intolerant after we have considered every pro and cons of anything. We know that more tolerant means a fool or a block-headed person. Tolerance does not mean to bear with any violence, injustice, unlawful acts with patience or silence. It means to watch and observe anything out of great patience. It aims or points at keeping politeness before having a clearance of anything.

Conclusion: Tolerance in true sense is to give consideration to others. Tolerance is a reflection of one’s own behavior and character. The consequence of tolerance is good for a tolerant. It is supported by every intellectual whole-heartedly.

Information Sources:

• churchofjesuschrist.org
• ontaheen.com

The Banana Tree

Components of rural development, importance of politeness, child labor in bangladesh, panasonic lummox fs30, we just found out how elon musk may finance his $43b twitter bid, conductive ink, marketing mix analyses of lg microwave oven of butterfly limited, symptoms of shingles, sodium diacetate – a chemical compound, latest post, oceanic crust, hydrogen valve, climate and rock weathering – the biggest carbon sinks are low-lying mountain ranges, finding novel physics in the debris of colliding neutron stars, sulfur and life’s origin, cathodic protection – a technique for controlling corrosion.

Intolerance Essay

Intolerance is the unacceptable situation for people to accept the views, beliefs, or behaviour which differs from their own. We have provided below some essay on intolerance under various words limit in order to help students. Now-a-days, essays and paragraphs writing are common strategy followed by the teachers in schools and colleges. It helps teachers in enhancing student’s skill and knowledge about any topic. All the intolerance essay provided here are written in very easy and simple sentences. So, students can select any of the essays given below according to their need and requirement:

Long and Short Essay on Intolerance in India in English

Intolerance essay 1 (100 words).

Intolerance is the unwillingness of accepting beliefs, behavior or practices of someone different person related to other cast, religion or custom. It may give rise to the high level hate, crimes and discrimination in the society. It gives rise the property of refusal in the mind and heart of any person to refuse, disallow or deny something (action or practice) happening against his/her will or practice. It does not allow people to live with equality, indiscrimination, freedom, or other social rights. Intolerance in the society generally arises due to the cast, culture, gender, religion or any unbearable practice.

Intolerance Essay 2 (150 words)

Intolerance is the act of refusal to accept, appreciate and respect any practices, beliefs, or opinions of the people of another group, religion, cast or custom. Israeli Jews and Palestinians are the best example of high degree of intolerance because of the various issues of identity, self-determination, security, statehood, etc. Intolerance between them is resulted in continue inter-group violence. On the other hand, tolerance is the quality which appreciates equality in the society even after the existence of diversity. It appreciates people for the ability to live as well as let others live whether the person belongs to any religion, cast or custom.

Intolerance disallow a person to go together, follow or bear the practices or opinions by the people of different religion, cast, or nationality from one’s own. According to the William Ury notes, “tolerance is not just agreeing with one another or remaining indifferent in the face of injustice, but rather showing respect for the essential humanity in every person.”

Intolerance Essay 3 (200 words)

Tolerance is considered as the good quality of a man and it is most necessary to make a society. However, intolerance leads a person, people or society to the worst disaster. If we have a look in the history and mythology, we will see variety of horrible acts of intolerance. People develop the feeling of jealous and then intolerance just because of simple things like someone cannot bear the importance of his/her close one’s in the eye of most effective person. One of the historical intolerance acts is Aurangzeb killed many Hindu people under feet of elephants as he developed intolerance to the Hinduism, etc. Some people quarrel to each other as they cannot tolerate each other’s behaviors, beliefs and practices. Intolerant people become unable to take right decision to someone just because of intolerance to hear the views of someone different.

Intolerance is a bad quality which leads a person, society or country towards disaster. On the other hand, people with tolerance can live in the society with equality even after being different in cast, religion, opinion, and practice. Tolerance is a power which makes people able to do justice by hearing and accessing the different views of others. Democratic countries have tolerance as an indispensable quality. Being a tolerant person helps in tolerating any bitter condition in the surrounding areas. Habit of tolerance is the individual culture of every citizen in India. Tolerance is an essential quality of painless life. India is a democratic and developing country where people develop habit of tolerance from their childhood under the guidance of elders so it is rare to see intolerance in India.

Intolerance Essay 4 (250 words)

Introduction

Intolerance is generally a condition in which people do not accept the practices or behaviors by the people of different religion, cast or culture other than their own’s. In a multiculturalism conference held in the United States, participants asked that, “How can we be tolerant of those who are intolerant of us?” In certain condition, tolerance is not good however it does not mean that for each bad situation one should create the condition of intolerance. Tolerance is an integral quality to the people of different groups related to one another in a respectful and understanding manner. It helps the people of different groups to resolve their differences.

What is Intolerance in India

We cannot say that there is intolerance in India as this country is the best suited example of an idiom called “Unity in Diversity”. It is the fast growing country because of its unique quality of having unity in diversity. It is the country where people of different cast, creed, religion, custom, culture, tradition and practice are living together for years without any difference. They celebrate their fairs and festivals with great enthusiasm and without any interference of people of different group. They have proper understanding and respect to each other’s beliefs, custom and practices. Citizens of India have the quality of tolerance which provides them ability to live and let others live.

A statement of a Bollywood actor, Amir Khan, about the growing climate of intolerance in India was very surprising to everyone as he has made such a serious comment over an unfortunate incident. India is a country where no one can blame that people here are developing intolerance as everyone has proper understanding to each other’s religion and practice.

How Intolerance affects the Society

Intolerance (especially religious intolerance) separates people living in the society and it acts as divider of the nations. It creates the condition of disrespect, enmity and war in the society between people of different cast, religion, opinions and practices. It puts neighbor against neighbor by creating disbelief to each other.

Intolerance Essay 5 (300 words)

The situation of intolerance may occur because of economically depressed and politically charged situation among the people of different groups. In such situation, people find hard to tolerate those different from themselves. It harms everyone badly and most importantly the nation. The country where intolerance exists may be the home of discrimination, repression, dehumanization, and violence.

What is Intolerance

Intolerance is the separation of unity which creates the condition of dislike, refusal and quarrel among the people of various groups. Whereas, tolerance appreciates unity in diversity (India is a best suited example) and develops understanding to live equally. Tolerance is the ability which develops positive attitude in the people’s mind towards those with different religions, practices, opinions, nationality, customs, etc. Intolerance is the condition of failure which motivates people to dislike the practices, opinions and beliefs of people related to another group. For example, a high degree of intolerance exists between the Israeli Jews and the Palestinians. Intolerance gives rise to the inter-group violence in the society.

Reasons of Intolerance in Indian Society

Intolerance arises in the society because of various reasons. Generally religious intolerance arises in the society which divides the nation. It creates the condition of war by setting neighbors against neighbors. Intolerance may arise between individuals because of the absence of their own experiences. Generally they make their opinions to one another on assumptions which get influenced very easily by the positive or negative beliefs of closest or most influential ones in life.

Individual attitudes towards other person of different group also influenced very easily by his/her images in the media. Bad education system based on the myths can also dehumanize students against other cultures instead of promoting cultural understanding and tolerance among people for diversity and differences in the society. Tolerance is the quality which motivates people to live happily and let others live.

Intolerance Essay 6 (400 words)

Intolerance is the condition of refusal of beliefs, opinions, and practices of people of different groups. Growing tolerance in the society drives different groups apart by creating a sense of denial in any way. The best example of intolerance in the society is separation between black and white South Africans in the South Africa. There is a huge level of social distance between these two groups which gives rise to the inter-group resentment and hostility.

About Intolerance

Intolerance is a dangerous and unacceptable quality which should be suppressed to grow in the society. It destroys the growing power of any country by setting people against people of different groups. People living in the intolerant society groups can do aggressive attack in order to express their denial to the opinions, practices, and behavior of other people related to different group. Intolerance can be religious, racial or other types however all badly affect the nation growth and development. It is an international problem because of the religious, cultural, traditional, customs, or way of thinking differences of people. It is the main cause of war among people or nations. Good education system, developing tolerance and agreement are better ways using which the problem of intolerance can be solved to a great extent.

Intolerant people never accept someone different which has been the main issue since ancient history all around the world. Intolerance makes people angry and violent to each other (people of various cast and religion) very easily to something they cannot tolerate in anyway. Good education system and tolerance make them able to know how to get control over their intolerance. The practice of tolerance can be practiced from the school age of kids. They should be taught to accept differences in the society.

Effects of Intolerance

Intolerance worries people, society and nation as it creates violence among people of different groups. It causes exclusion of those who are different and intolerable such as existence of non-Muslims in the Muslim state or its opposite. Intolerance makes human beings narrow mindedness and does not give chance to thing positive about anything happening in different way in the society or nation. It has high level destroying capacity and very dangerous for the nation where it exist. So, it is better to stop it from growing in any society or country instead of reducing its percentage.

How to Deal with Intolerance

Intolerance should be discouraged and tolerance should be encouraged among people. Tolerance can be promoted by using various methods. Intimate inter-group contact enhances personal experiences to each other and reduces intolerance. Intimate inter-group contact should be continued to make it effective and useful. Dialogue mechanisms can also be effective for enhancing communication on both sides. It helps people to express their needs and interests. Media should select positive images to promote tolerance and understanding towards cultural sensitivity. Education is the best way to promote tolerance and peaceful coexistence in the society. Students should be provided tolerant environment in the school so that they can respect and understand different cultures. Students can better develop the inter-cultural understanding in the tolerant environment.

Related Information:

International Day for Tolerance and Peace

Related Posts

Money essay, music essay, importance of education essay, education essay, newspaper essay, my hobby essay, leave a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Essay On Religious Intolerance

Religious Intolerance Religious intolerance is the “unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect opinions or beliefs contrary to one’s own” (intolerance). Difference in religious beliefs within one country has caused conflicts between people. Although nowadays many countries respect one’s religion, there are still some countries such as North Korea, Japan, and Pakistan where religious intolerances are still practiced. Since 1945, Kim Il Sung strongly promoted the anti-religious policies. As a result, by 1955, all religious groups and religious ceremonies in North Korea either disappeared or were hidden underground. Kim Il Sung, under the influence of communist religion views, believed that religious intolerance is necessary for three main …show more content…

Japan’s religious belief, which is shown through the shrines, Buddhist temples, and people’s beliefs, is based on ancestor worship, which is most close to the belief of Buddhism. Therefore, their belief naturally led Japan to become a Buddhist country. However, in 1549, Christianity was first introduced in Japan by Francisco de Xavier. During that time period, considering the benefit of trading with Western countries, many Japanese favored Western civilization, and the number of people converting to Christianity went over 70 million. However, in 1587, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, who was first friendly towards Christianity, deported missionaries to prohibit Western civilization from invading the country. Since then, persecution against Christians became widespread in Japan …show more content…

Those kids, who are educated in countries with religious intolerance, are taught and learned at an early age. Therefore, they may not be aware of the problems. People around the world should feel responsible for teaching those kids what religious freedom is and that they have the right to choose their religion. If not, those kids will grow up and repeat the cycle of religious intolerance. Moreover, people who are against religious tolerance need to change their attitude and respect other religions. Without understanding, the vicious cycle of religious intolerance will never

Summary Of When Religion Becomes Lethal By Charles Kimball

When different political views and spiritual beliefs are put together, the consequences behind that mixture are often dire and it ultimately results to violence. He emphasizes the importance of learning the past as well as the most up-to-date events of these particular religions. Kimball does his best to explain why those types of problems tend to occur, but he also gives us insight as to how these problems can be corrected, which could lead to a better hope for the future. All it takes is people of good faith as well people of goodwill to come together to speak aloud against the fundamentalists.

Dbq Essay On Religion And Immigration

Religion and immigrants have been two leading factors when it comes to wars throughout the world. These problems around the globe caused for many immigrants from Europe who were escaping religious persecution to settle in what is now the United States, this added population would aid in the establishment of the original colonies. But would a Nation in its infancy that was mostly populated by immigrants want the conflict that comes with different religions living together? The United States would grow to be a successful nation over the next two centuries, so is it plausible that the founding fathers took into consideration that religion had the potential to crumble the foundation of this country they were assembling?

North Korea Cultural Analysis

North Koreans speaks the Korean language containing some Chinese words and is the recognized language. The ethnicities of North Korea comprises of 99.8% Koreans and 0.2% Chinese. The religion of NK has a long history impacting religion beliefs of North Koreans. Confucianism, Buddhism, Shamanism, Ch’ŏndogyo, and Christianity are the religions that Koreans have been influenced by. The government does not have a ban on religion in their constitution.

Holocaust Bystanders Essay

Intolerance can form through fear of other people or beliefs. It can result in the separation of groups of people as well as the destruction of their properties, social status, and ideas. Intolerance is the disapproval of differences in religion, actions, looks, or even social class. SD2

First Global Age Analysis

For example, the Japanese government sought to limit the freedom of the people. A ban was placed against all ships from being sent abroad, and any Japanese people living abroad would be put to death if they returned to Japan. Japanese leaders also banned the spread of Christianity, as it was viewed as a threat to the unity of the people. All those who preached Christianity were imprisoned, and those who turned them in were praised. These laws were set in place to reduce the amount of ideas that people could hear and possibly use to challenge the government (D-7).

China And Japan Similarities Between 1450 And 1750

In Japan, Europeans traders and missionaries were welcomed at first. But due to the disrespect of the new christian

Essay On Religious Freedom In America

There are many views and opinions of the state of the United States on this subject. It has long been a puzzling issue that never seems to seize. America should have religious freedom, because it is a constitutional right to Americans. Prayer in school, gay marriage, and governmental control, are among some of the main issues in this topic.

North Korea And 1984 Comparison Essay

To start off, the citizens of Oceania are devoted Big Brother. They have such a deep love for him that he is comparable to God. They undoubtedly follow him, and believe whatever he says. The people of North Korea are also very loyal to their leader Kim Jong Un and still celebrate the birthdays of their past leaders.

Essay On Intolerable Acts

Intolerable Acts The Intolerable Acts can be viewed as one of the first sparks to the flaming fire of America claiming Independence. The Intolerable Acts, also called the Coercive Acts, were a series of laws passed in 1774 in order to punish the colonies for defying their rule. Four out of five of the Intolerable Acts were directed towards Massachusetts directly and the other was directed at Quebec. All of the Acts were supposed to stop the colonies from defying England’s Rule and show the colonies that England was still in charge.

What Were The Strengths And Weaknesses Of The Tokugawa Dynasty

Near the beginning, there were an estimated 300,000 Christians in Japan. The ban forced Christianity underground. “ In this effort to

Voltaire And Diderot Analysis

Religious Tolerance/Intolerance during the Age of Enlightenment Based On the Views of Voltaire and Diderot In history, religion was one of the factors that can unite or separate men. It has a way of creating principles perceived as moral or immoral depending on a religious group’s teachings. It is so powerful that it created wars, separated families, and set territorial boundaries. The Age of Enlightenment, which was a philosophical movement, was the time of religious reforms in Europe -- to end warfare associated with religious intolerance.

How Did Christianity Change Roman Culture

Only a few Buddhist centers survived after the invasion of Muslim armies. On the contrast, Christian churches preserved and spread Christian teachings and the achievements of Greco-Roman civilization. This laid the foundation for future development of the western civilization. The history of Christianity is inseparable from the history of western culture and of western

Religion Thesis Statement

The author gives a view on the religions in the global context. 5. Topic Sentence: The contemporary world today combines a wide diversity of world religions and in order to preserve peace people ought to display high level of mutual tolerance.

Totalitarian Government In George Orwell's 1984

In 1949, a man predicted the domination of citizens by the totalitarian government and their custom of technologies to dictate the society. His name is George Orwell, a well-known British author, who wrote one of the most famous dystopian novels, 1984. The novel 1984 illustrates the totalitarian society and the life of Winston Smith, who works at the Ministry of truth and his humiliation by the party of the country, Oceania. George Orwell’s exaggeration and mockery of the totalitarian governments in the novel 1984 is now turning out to be one of the nightmare come true in our modern society.

Religion Cause More Harm Than Good To Society Essay

In the book Beyond Tractability it says religion serves as a way for people to distinguish themselves from others. Just like the way people use ethnic groups and race to distinguish themselves from others. Religion now serves the same purpose [2]. So now just like the way we have racial discrimination and ethnic discrimination, there is religious discrimination. NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF RELIGION ON SOCIETY

More about Essay On Religious Intolerance

Related topics.

• Christianity
• Homosexuality

Sign Up Now

Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents

Already registered? click here to login

By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service , privacy policy and student honor code .

• Homework Help
• Essay Examples
• Citation Generator
• Writing Guides
• Essay Title Generator
• Essay Topic Generator
• Essay Outline Generator
• Flashcard Generator
• Plagiarism Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Conclusion Generator
• Thesis Statement Generator
• Introduction Generator
• Literature Review Generator
• Hypothesis Generator

Lactose Intolerance Term Paper

For example, forms of lactose may be found in many prepared foods, such as "bread, cereal, lunch meats, salad dressings, mixes for cakes, cookies, pancakes, and biscuits, and frozen dinners" ("Why"). Many consumers and patients may not be aware of these hidden milk products, and so, may continue to suffer symptoms even after they remove most milk products from their diet. Thus, the nutritionist must be able to advise patients on hidden lactose, as well as devise a diet that is rich in calcium and protein, while avoiding milk products. The patient should be advised to avoid milk and cheeses, but also look for other ingredients such as "whey, milk solids, powdered milk, lactose, and dried milk" when they shop for food. Other foods, such as "non-dairy creamer, margarine, whipped topping, instant potatoes, soups, and breakfast drinks, and even breakfast cereals" may also contain milk derivatives that can cause problems in the diet (Editors). The most important concern, however, may be the effects calcium has on other areas of the body. One report notes, "The nutrient also plays an important role in regulating other body functions such as blood clotting, blood pressure, nerve transmission, and contraction and relaxation of muscles (including normal heartbeats)" ("Living" 66). Thus, the patient must be always aware of what they are eating and drinking, and the nutritionist can aid the patient in many ways by also understanding the complexities of the disease and the appropriate dietary controls. Since the only way to control the disease is through diet, it is imperative that the patient and the nutritionist understand the implications of the disease, and devise a diet that is appropriate for the disease and the individual. There are many foods that are rich in calcium and/or protein, but do not contain lactose. For example, "canned salmon with bones, sardines, collard greens, turnip greens, broccoli, and tofu" ("Why") are all excellent sources of calcium and/or protein that do not contain lactose. Adding items such as these to the diet can ensure a balanced diet that meets the needs of the patient while removing some of the concerns of a lactose free diet. However, there are other concerns that must be addressed when planning a lactose free diet. Some food items, such as Swiss chard, spinach, and rhubarb, contain fair amounts of calcium, but the calcium is not usable by the body. In addition, vitamin D is necessary for the successful adsorption of calcium; therefore, the diet must contain enough vitamin D to ensure the calcium consumed is actually used by the body (Editors). A sample diet for treating the disease might include many leafy and green vegetables, such as kale, turnip and collard greens, bok choy, broccoli, canned oysters, shrimp, salmon with bones, and sardines, small amounts of processed cheese or cheddar cheese, which contain far less lactose than milk, meats, vegetables, and even molasses for sweetening, which does not contain lactose. Consumers should also be very aware of packaged foods they purchase, and add them to the diet only if they do not contain hidden forms of lactose. Many nutritionists and physicians also recommend the patient try the many products that are available to combat lactose intolerance, such as "Lactaid," which is taken before a meal containing lactose products. These dietary supplements are sold over-the-counter and they can help many people digest lactose more effectively. There are also a growing number of lactose-free or low-lactose dairy products in the marketplace that patients may be able to substitute for milk products in their diets and in recipes. This diet helps in the treatment of the disease because it removes lactose in the diet, thus removing the problem with lactose digestion by the small intestine. In addition, the successful diet will contain a balance of the right vitamins and minerals to ensure the proper adsorption of calcium and protein, while effectively blocking lactose. The disease can be distressing and uncomfortable, but with the proper attention to food and nutrition, patients can lead healthy and comfortable lives even if they suffer from lactose intolerance. In conclusion, researching this topic has given me considerable knowledge and insight into the problems people face that suffer from this disease. I thought I understood what this disease entailed, but I discovered there was much more to it than simply the inability to drink milk or…

Sources Used in Documents:

References Author not Available. "Why Does Milk Bother Me?" Niddk.nih.gov. 2004. 8 July 2004. http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/lactoseintolerance_ez/index.htm Editors. "Lactose Intolerance." Gastro.org. 2004. 8 July 2004. http://www.gastro.org/clinicalRes/brochures/lactose.html Living with Lactose Intolerance: If You Take Some Simple Steps, You Can Continue to Enjoy a Variety of Dietary Favorites." Ebony Oct. 2002: 66+.

Cite this Document:

"Lactose Intolerance" (2004, July 08) Retrieved April 20, 2024, from https://www.paperdue.com/essay/lactose-intolerance-174419

"Lactose Intolerance" 08 July 2004. Web.20 April. 2024. < https://www.paperdue.com/essay/lactose-intolerance-174419 >

"Lactose Intolerance", 08 July 2004, Accessed.20 April. 2024, https://www.paperdue.com/essay/lactose-intolerance-174419

Related Documents

Lactose if one of the major components.

Lactose if one of the major components of milk, and plays a crucial role in human development. This paper will examine the structure, function, physical properties, chemical properties, reactions, and everyday uses of lactose. In addition, a discussion of the common issue of lactose intolerance in humans is included. A natural sugar found in milk, lactose is likely one of the most commonly identifiable of all milk ingredients (except perhaps calcium).

Enzymes Are Highly Selective and Substrate-Specific Catalysts

Enzymes are highly selective and substrate-specific catalysts that work by lowering activation energy for reactions thus increasing the rate of metabolic reactions. In enzymatic reactions, substrates are molecules binding onto enzymes' active sites to form enzyme-substrate complexes (Cornish-Bowden, 2004). Lactose is a disaccharide sugar commonly found in milk and lactase is the enzyme responsible for catalyzing lactose into its subsequent monosaccharide products; glucose and galactose. In line with this, lactose

Nutrition Analysis a Food Diary

The latter two can be enjoyed cooked or cut up fresh, in a salad. If she uses spinach instead of lettuce in the salad, the subject can boost fiber even further and add a little more iron to her diet. Current consumption of iron is just under recommended amounts. High fiber fruits, including apples, oranges and pears, will not add significant calories if consumed in moderation (How Do I

Yak Milk: Niche or Nightmare

As Yogurt and ice cream as a product category are pure milk-based products, the richness and superior quality of Yak milk will definitely make a highly successful brand. Product proliferation and also its extension into rural markets through repeated does of reminder ads will also help in cornering greater market share as a whole. On the other hand, shopping malls, city kiosks and supermarkets could be the point of

Dietary Supplements: Calcium to Supplement

Moreover, the study did not take into consideration the fact that certain persons are more at risk for later bone loss due to osteoporosis, because of frame size and genetic history (Caucasian and Asian women are at particular risk), or because they cannot take in enough calcium through normal food sources, due to lactose intolerance. Rather than attempting to prevent fractures later in life, after bone mass is already on

Carbohydrates and the Glycemic Index

In addition, it may be helpful in treating diabetes and heart disease. Lactose intolerance is the body's inability to digest lactose, which is a dairy sugar. It's caused by a deficiency of the enzyme lactase, in the small intestines. Treatment includes eliminating dairy products from the diet, yet, milk substitutes are necessary, to ensure that enough calcium, vitamin D, riboflavin, and protein are consumed. Diabetes and hypoglycemia relate to the amount

Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay

Introduction, hindu-buddhism, chinese religions, abraham monotheism.

Religious tolerance is imperative in modern societies because it allows people with separate faiths, beliefs or values to coexist with one another. Acknowledgment of the validity of other people’s religions requires placing these different religions in their traditional contexts in order to understand them.

Furthermore, understanding the history of other cultures allows one to appreciate how similar experiences led to different conceptual systems. One must realize that people created their belief systems in order to make sense of their worlds or the chaos around them. Therefore, every religion is reflective of the culture and history of its followers.

In order to become religiously tolerant, one must familiarize oneself with the history of this religion. The Hindu pattern is again evidence of the fact that all religions are depictions of the experiences of the people involved and the conceptual systems that they deduced from them.

The Hindu religion has more than one holy text, more than one religious authority, several deities, theological systems and understandings of morality. Adherents of this religion are highly tolerant because of its henotheistic nature. Nonetheless, most followers still believe in one Supreme Being who manifests his powers through different divinities.

Central aspects of Hinduism include Vishnu (the preserver), Brahma (the creator) and Shiva (the destroyer). Belief in the cycle of life i.e. the Samsara is central to the teaching of these adherents. However, it is possible for one to achieve enlightenment and thus escape this cycle. Many assert that one’s present life stems from the consequences of one’s past life.

This religion has four major doctrines that include dharma (righteousness in religion), artha (economic success) and kama (sense gratification) and nivritti (renunciation of the world). The latter is achieved through renunciation of the world in a process called moksha. Mankind’s supreme goal is to reach moksha.

Therefore, moksha is a solution of samsara. It is derived from the Buddhist faith. Doctrines from the latter religion were crucial in resolving complications in this religion. All these concepts can be traced back to the history of the Hindu religion. By dissecting the experiences of the Hindu people, one can understand why they came to follow their present practices and this should foster religious tolerance among non Hindus (Esposito et al., 2002).

The Hindu religion began as far back as 4000 BCE in the Indus Valley. It began with the Indus valley culture, which was held by native Indians. Thereafter, some Aryan tribes from Central Asia and Europe entered India and introduced Vedism. Since their immigration was done slowly or in waves (according to recent scholarly discoveries), most natives easily took up the Aryan religious with ease. This explains how the latter religion started amalgamating different belief systems. The Vedic belief system underwent various changes between 900 and 500 BCE. At first, the religion began with an emphasis on sacrificial rites. Emphasis was on perfecting people’s performance of the rites. However with time, some intellectuals decided that focusing too much on the rites instead of the wisdom associated with them was wrong.

They were called the Upanishads, and they introduced the focus on total dissociation from society in order to reach ultimate spirituality. They challenged the original structures of the Vedic religion because the latter was highly organized around sacrifices and priestly rituals. The priests who performed these rites were called Brahmans. They represented the capacity of the human to possess divine power.

When the Upanishads introduced their concept of total detachment from society or moksha, the Brahmans felt that this would threaten the organization of their society. As a result, they proposed a middle way in which one could strive towards moksha but still maintain the social hierarchies in society. It should be noted that the priestly class of the Brahmans arose earlier on in the Vedic faith because of some fire rituals that the Vedic believers carried out.

These rituals yielded successful results and led to the belief that their priests had a superior status. The Upanishads wanted to internalize the ritualistic process, hence their shift to the individual. This belief in developing the spiritual self led to the acceptance of moksha as a solution towards the problem of cyclical life (Fallows, 1998).

Thus far, one can appreciate why Hinduism has a hierarchical system that places the priestly class above all others. This was a way of preserving order in their society. One can also appreciate why the religion appears to be polytheistic. The god of fire and other gods were manifestations of a supreme being. One can also comprehend why these adherents believe in moksha; it provides them with a mechanism for solving the problems of this life.

It also gives them something to aspire to or work towards. This small history, therefore, heightens religious tolerance because it places these belief systems in context and establishes the experiences that led to their development. Some of them were social (entry of the Aryans into the Hindu culture), others were intellectual (internalizing rituals) while others were economic (preservation of social order for material prosperity).

In China, some people practice Taoism, others Confucianism and others believe in Buddhism. Certain followers combine elements of all three faiths. The experiences of members of these cultures also provide important insights concerning the influence of people’s experiences in the development of their belief system. By placing those occurrences in context, one can then gain religious tolerance of adherents of these faiths even though one does not ascribe to any of them.

In Confucianism, most adherents believe that social harmony is the most important goal (Hopfe & Woodward, 2004). This school of thought was started by Confucius. He lived at a time when his society was struggling with the reinforcement of laws. Confucius thought about the ineffectiveness of coercive laws.

People simply followed them without really understanding them. This meant that the method was reactive rather than proactive. The intellectual proposed that if people internalized behaviors before acting, then they would act in an appropriate manner. In this regard, they would abide by their mutual obligations, and thus prevent the occurrence of disorder in that society.

Confucius, therefore, created the concept of mutual relationships and the need to respect one another. From this small history, one can understand why loyalty, etiquette and humanness are so important in the Confucian faith today. It was an attempt at creating social harmony by ensuring that everyone understood his place. Through education and personal effort, it was possible for people to become better.

In the Taoist school of thought, it is held that the ideal way of life is to accept things as they are. When one resists nature, then one actually causes things to get worse. It is in line with this thinking that Taoists believe in the Ying and Yang.

One represents the strong and hard force and the other represents the soft and feminine force. Therefore, by finding a balance between these forces in the universe, then calmness will prevail. The Taoist faith came after the Confucian school of thought. Confucianism taught about personal involvement and striving to become better.

However, subsequent intellectuals realized that they needed a new way of thinking that promoted greater peace and harmony. They lived at a time when there was too much active striving as seen in the warring era. Therefore, it was imperative to introduce the concept of yielding to nature. In this school of thought, it was argued that there was a force of life called Tao that flows everywhere.

One’s major goal was to be in harmony with the Tao. Through the use compassion, moderation and humiliation, one can develop important virtues. Most problems arise when one tries to fight or interfere with the Tao by acting in opposition to nature. One must strive to find answers within through meditation. The story of the emergence of Taoism demonstrates that experiences are crucial to the formation of one’s belief systems.

It was a response to the challenges of Confucianism and the social upheavals it had created. Too much active strive led to war in that community; this prompted an alternative way of thinking. Once again, one can become tolerant to this religion by realizing that it was a natural creation of the political and social problems of that time. Taoism complemented Confucianism in this society. In fact, many individuals abide by the principles of both these faiths.

They epitomize religious tolerance because they understand that belief systems carry a certain purpose in one’s society or one’s history. The same reasoning allows one to understand why Buddhism plays an important role in the Chinese society as well as many others in Asia. It is philosophical in nature and has generated minimal conflict with other faiths hence its acceptance (Keown, 1996).

Judaism, Islam, and Christianity are the three main religions that have come to be associated with Abraham monotheism. A large part of Christian scriptures have been adopted from the Jewish faith. Similarly, many parts of the Islamic faith have stories or portions from the Jewish scriptures. In order to enhance religious tolerance, it is imperative to look at the history of the formation of these faiths in order to understand why their adherents hold the beliefs that they do.

Judaism is a religion in which people believe that they have a special relationship with God. This stems from the fact that they are a chosen people, having descended from Abraham. God gave them a gift of laws called the Torah to assist in maintaining their relationship with him and with one another.

The Jews have been misunderstood by many as a ritualistic and legalistic religion as seen through their scriptures, which are called Torah (interpreted as laws). In order to negate these misunderstandings, one must understand why the Jews called their scriptures the Torah.

The Jews think of themselves as God’s special people. It is believed that in order to promote harmony with God, they needed some guidance. Also, God needed to give them a commentary on how they could act towards one another; this was the reason why he gave them the guidance of the Torah.

Therefore, one can become tolerant of this religion by understanding the origin of their ritualistic practices. Judaism is also a religion that is highly diverse. The diversity stems from some cultural and theological experiences of members of this religion. Some individuals resettled along the Mediterranean or other parts of Europe and thus created their own version of the religion.

Conversely, some individuals understood the rituals and religious practices differently. These theological differences led to the birth of reconstructionists, reform Jews, Liberal Jews, Orthodox and Conservative Jews. Therefore, a cultural dissection of the Jewish religious system allows one to understand it. In this regard, one can accept adherents of the faith based on the premise that their history and their values led them to that place.

Christianity is the most predominant faith in the world today. In the US, most citizens associate themselves with some form of Christianity. It is still necessary to understand the development of Christianity in order to foster tolerance among the various sects if one happens to be a Christian or to build tolerance for non Christians.

The Christian faith began when Jesus of Nazareth was born in Jerusalem; a Jewish community. He was regarded as the incarnation of God as he was his son. This was seen through the fulfillment of prophecy as well as his life on earth – he performed miracles and did other divine things.

After he died and resurrected, the first Christian church officially began. Therefore, for non Christians, it is possible to understand why Christians focus on Jesus; they believe that he was God living amongst men. Furthermore, Christianity is monotheistic because having such a supreme being is the only consistent way to understand what their Holy Scriptures say about nature and the universe.

Religious tolerance can be effectively promoted when one understands the experiences and the history of the people who abide by them. Hindu-Buddhism, Chinese religions and Abraham Monotheism all emanated from a series of events or encounters that shaped those faith systems.

Some issues were political such as the warring states in China and Taoism; others were social such as the need to stick to certain social structures as in Hinduism. In essence different experiences led to different conceptual frameworks hence religions. It is this statement that makes religious tolerance possible.

Esposito, J. Fasching, D. and Lewis, T. (2002). World Religions Today . Oxford: OUP

Fallows, W. (1998). Religions East and West . Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Publishers

Hopfe, M. & Woodward, R. (2004). Religions of the World . London: Pearson-Prentice hall

Keown, D. (1996). Buddhism: a very short introduction . Oxford: Oxford University press

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, June 19). Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/

"Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay." IvyPanda , 19 June 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay'. 19 June.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/.

1. IvyPanda . "Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Importance of Religious Tolerance Essay." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/religious-tolerance/.

• Vedic Religion Analysis and Interpretation
• Religion Doctrines: Moksha and Salvation
• Vedic Hinduism, Classical Hinduism, and Buddhism: A Uniting Belief Systems
• Confucianism and Taoism
• Taoism: Growth of Religion
• Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism Elements
• Torah and Qur'an: The Laws and Ethical Norms
• Taoism: The Origin and Basic Beliefs
• Salvation and Self in Hinduism and Theravada Buddhism
• The Comparison of Buddhism and Taoism Philosophies
• Navigating Religious Beliefs in the Workplace
• Dr. Baxter's video lecture Response paper
• The Divine Life Church
• Role of Religion in Public Life (Church and State)
• Religion in America: Past, Present, and Future

Lactose Intolerance

How it works

Lactose in tolerance takes place when small intestine’s lining creates smaller amounts of the enzyme called lactase. Thediseasesymptomsare usually mild, but insome cases can be great. So,people with this disease are not able to completely take in lactose. Ranging from 30 to 50 million Americans have some level of the disease. If you are lowin lactase, food moves through your colon rather than being digested. Like I have said before, it is a lack oflactasethat is making people have this disease.

They do not have enough lactase in them to be able to have things with dairy and if they do, it will create all sorts of problems.

Those low lactase measures might relate tooth erdiseases like celiac, viral or contagious infections of the small intestine and cystic fibrosis. Usually this disease will happen in adulthood, not so much in infants or the younger children. Premature babies could also have the disease because of not enough lactase. Lactose in tolerance is often in Africans, Hispanics, Asians and Americans. It can also have a higher risk for people who have had cancermedicaltreatment.

There are five symptoms for lactose intolerance. This includes diarrhea, nausea, abdominal cramping, bloating and gas. This occurs whenyouhave toomuch ofit. Usually when you have a small amount, it won’t do much depending on the person.I didn’t find anything to prevent it, but there is treatment for it. As I have said, you can make changes in your diet.

This includes lowering the amount of dairy intakeand know where you will be good as to the amount and not by chancehave too much.They test the disease by giving you a breath test. You can take a supplement whileeating foods with dairy to help relieve the symptoms caused by lactose intolerance.You can treat it by decreasing how much of the lactose you are consuming or just completely cut it out. It all is depending on how severe it isof the person who has it. You cantalkto adietician on how to control your diet.

There isn’t a cure for lactose in tolerance,but it shouldn’t determine how long you live because it iscurable. There arealso supplements you can taketoget your calcium. Depending on if you aren’t taking those nutrients that youneedand thatyou aren’t getting from dairy, it could affect your heath. So, it ultimately depends on people making sure that they keep track of that.For most cases, it does not change your appetite and for mild cases you don’t have to cut dairy off altogether, you just must reduce.

With severe cases, however, they would have to cut out all dairy and get thosenutrients,again, from a supplement. You want to make sure you are getting all the nutrients that you need. Therearealsoother optionstomilk such as Lactaidfor example, which can be added in to milk.This transforms lactose to basic sugars that are simply digested. I,myselfhave tried drinking almond milk and it has helped reduce the symptoms I used to get from milk.

Cite this page

Lactose Intolerance. (2020, Jan 19). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/lactose-intolerance/

"Lactose Intolerance." PapersOwl.com , 19 Jan 2020, https://papersowl.com/examples/lactose-intolerance/

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Lactose Intolerance . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/lactose-intolerance/ [Accessed: 20 Apr. 2024]

"Lactose Intolerance." PapersOwl.com, Jan 19, 2020. Accessed April 20, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/lactose-intolerance/

"Lactose Intolerance," PapersOwl.com , 19-Jan-2020. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/lactose-intolerance/. [Accessed: 20-Apr-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Lactose Intolerance . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/lactose-intolerance/ [Accessed: 20-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Website Inauguration Function.
• Vocational Placement Cell Inauguration
• Media Coverage.
• Certificate & Recommendations
• Privacy Policy
• Science Project Metric
• Social Studies 8 Class
• Computer Fundamentals
• Introduction to C++
• Programming Methodology
• Programming in C++
• Data structures
• Boolean Algebra
• Object Oriented Concepts
• Database Management Systems
• Open Source Software
• Operating System
• PHP Tutorials
• Earth Science
• Physical Science
• Sets & Functions
• Coordinate Geometry
• Mathematical Reasoning
• Statics and Probability
• Accountancy
• Business Studies
• Political Science
• English (Sr. Secondary)

Hindi (Sr. Secondary)

• Punjab (Sr. Secondary)
• Accountancy and Auditing
• Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Technology
• Automobile Technology
• Electrical Technology
• Electronics Technology
• Hotel Management and Catering Technology
• IT Application
• Marketing and Salesmanship
• Office Secretaryship
• Stenography
• Hindi Essays
• English Essays

Letter Writing

• Shorthand Dictation

Essay on “Tolerance” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.

The world needs more Tolerance

“Tolerance is the only real test of civilization”. It was Arthur Kelps who thus extolled the virtue of tolerance. Man in the 21 st century believes he is more civilized than his ancestors. But is he also more tolerant than them? Unfortunately, the virtue of tolerance is not abundant in the world of today and the world is in dire need of it.

          Tolerance can be defined as the possession of  a fair and objective perspective and attitude towards those people who are of different races, religions, nations or have a set of opinions, beliefs and ideas the differ from our own.

          The importance of tolerance lies in its ability to make a human being broad enough in mind to be receptive to all  kinds of ideas. This, in turn , enables on e to widen one’s knowledge and exercise more freedom of choice and jugement for oneself. At the same time it creates a deeper understanding of other’s views and beliefs.

          Today, tolerance seems to be at a discount at all levels. At the most trivial sign of disagreement hot words are exchanged, almost immediately escalating into a fight and sometimes even murder. Family members find it difficult to put up with one another’s shortcomings – after all which human being is perfect? Communities, social groups, facial groups and nations- at all levels, there appears to be an acute lack of tolerance. Trivial misunderstandings, even rumors, give rise to riots with the accompanying bloodshed and permanent acres on relationship ; at the national level, there is civil war and border wars. So often a personal matter such as religion has been distorted to create hatred amongst peoples. If people learnt to tolerate one another’s views , perhaps such sad occurrences could be reduced if not totally removed from this world!  

          Why has tolerance level come down? Or, indeed, has it come down at all? Human beings all through the ages have shown intolerance of views and beliefs and customs alien to their own. Wars such as the Crusades have been fought because of religious intolerance. Racial tension has grown due to intolerance. So long as human beings give in to envy, malice, jealousy and greed, tolerance will suffer. In rent times several longstanding and accepted social institution have shown signs of crumbling. Family values, social values are all being eroded. An increasing materialistic and consumer culture has not helped to nurture essential values. The individual has assumed such importance that anything that militates against that individual’s own ideas is not collated.

          Enlightenment of individual is necessary. Universal values of liberalism, the willingness to listen to others, at most agree to disagree and not enter into fights of domination – these qualities have to be bred at every level of society. Democracy, after all, means tolerance of dissent; if this tolerance is not imbibed and nurtured, it will only give rise to another Bosnia, Chechnya or Kashmir.

About evirtualguru_ajaygour

commentscomments

Nyc and thnks

No comment it is awesome.

this has almost all the information I need for my project.

thank you, e virtue guru

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Quick Links

Popular Tags

Visitors question & answer.

• Gangadhar Singh on Essay on “A Journey in a Crowded Train” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.
• Hemashree on Hindi Essay on “Charitra Bal”, “चरित्र बल” Complete Hindi Essay, Paragraph, Speech for Class 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 Students.
• S.J Roy on Letter to the editor of a daily newspaper, about the misuse and poor maintenance of a public park in your area.
• ashutosh jaju on Essay on “If there were No Sun” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.
• Unknown on Essay on “A Visit to A Hill Station” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes.

Download Our Educational Android Apps

Latest Desk

• Role of the Indian Youth | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.
• Students and Politics | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.
• Menace of Drug Addiction | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.
• How to Contain Terrorism | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.
• Sanskrit Diwas “संस्कृत दिवस” Hindi Nibandh, Essay for Class 9, 10 and 12 Students.
• Nagrik Suraksha Diwas – 6 December “नागरिक सुरक्षा दिवस – 6 दिसम्बर” Hindi Nibandh, Essay for Class 9, 10 and 12 Students.
• Jhanda Diwas – 25 November “झण्डा दिवस – 25 नवम्बर” Hindi Nibandh, Essay for Class 9, 10 and 12 Students.
• NCC Diwas – 28 November “एन.सी.सी. दिवस – 28 नवम्बर” Hindi Nibandh, Essay for Class 9, 10 and 12 Students.
• Example Letter regarding election victory.
• Example Letter regarding the award of a Ph.D.
• Example Letter regarding the birth of a child.
• Example Letter regarding going abroad.
• Letter regarding the publishing of a Novel.

Vocational Edu.

• English Shorthand Dictation “East and Dwellings” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Haryana General Sales Tax Act” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Deal with Export of Goods” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.
• English Shorthand Dictation “Interpreting a State Law” 80 and 100 wpm Legal Matters Dictation 500 Words with Outlines meaning.

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Panama Papers trial’s public portion comes to an unexpectedly speedy end

The Supreme Court stands in Panama City, Monday, April 8, 2024 as the trial starts for those charged in connection with the worldwide “Panama Papers” money laundering case. (AP Photo/Agustin Herrera)

Juergen Mossack, partner of the law firm Mossack-Fonseca, leaves the Supreme Court during the trial of the “Panama Papers” money laundering case in Panama City, Monday, April 8, 2024. (AP Photo/Agustin Herrera)

Lawyers and court workers leave the Supreme Court during a recess for the trial of the “Panama Papers” money laundering case in Panama City, Monday, April 8, 2024. (AP Photo/Agustin Herrera)

• Copy Link copied

PANAMA CITY (AP) — The public portion of a trial of more than two-dozen associates accused of helping some of the world’s richest people hide their wealth came to an unexpectedly speedy conclusion Friday when a Panamanian judge said she would take the two weeks of trial arguments and testimony under advisement.

The trial came eight years after 11 million leaked secret financial documents that became known as the “Panama Papers” prompted the resignation of the prime minister of Iceland and brought scrutiny to the then-leaders of Argentina and Ukraine, Chinese politicians, and Russian President Vladimir Putin, among others.

Judge Baloisa Marquínez noted Friday that the case included more than 530 volumes of information. The public trial had been expected to run to the end of the month. The judge has 30 working days to issue a verdict.

Those on trial include the owners of the Mossack Fonseca law firm that was at the heart of the 2016 massive document leak. Jürgen Mossack attended the trial, while his partner Ramón Fonseca did not for health reasons, according to his counsel.

Panamanian prosecutors allege that Mossack, Fonseca and their associates created a web of shell companies that used complex transactions to hide money linked to illicit activities in the “car wash” corruption scandal of Brazilian construction giant Odebrecht .

“This whole process from eight years ago until now … has had a lot of consequences for my family, on my personal situation and truly has been a great injustice not just for me but for all of the people who have worked with me,” Mossack testified Friday. “I trust your honor will know how to evaluate all that has been said here.”

Mossack had said at the start of the trial, as he has for years, that he was not guilty of the money laundering charges.

According to Panamanian prosecutors, the Mossack Fonseca firm created 44 shell companies, 31 of which opened accounts in Panama to hide money linked to the Brazilian scandal.

Fonseca has said the firm, which closed in 2018, had no control over how its clients might use offshore vehicles created for them.

Mossack Fonseca helped create and sell around 240,000 shell companies across four decades in business. It announced its closure in March 2018, two years after the scandal erupted.

The firm’s documents were first leaked to the German daily Suddeutsche Zeitung, and were shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, which began publishing collaborative reports with news organizations in 2016.

“The reputational deterioration, the media campaign, the financial siege and the irregular actions of some Panamanian authorities have caused irreparable damage, whose consequence is the complete cease of operations to the public,” the firm said in a statement at the time.

The Mossack and Fonseca were acquitted on other charges in 2022.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

NPR in Turmoil After It Is Accused of Liberal Bias

An essay from an editor at the broadcaster has generated a firestorm of criticism about the network on social media, especially among conservatives.

By Benjamin Mullin and Katie Robertson

NPR is facing both internal tumult and a fusillade of attacks by prominent conservatives this week after a senior editor publicly claimed the broadcaster had allowed liberal bias to affect its coverage, risking its trust with audiences.

Uri Berliner, a senior business editor who has worked at NPR for 25 years, wrote in an essay published Tuesday by The Free Press, a popular Substack publication, that “people at every level of NPR have comfortably coalesced around the progressive worldview.”

Mr. Berliner, a Peabody Award-winning journalist, castigated NPR for what he said was a litany of journalistic missteps around coverage of several major news events, including the origins of Covid-19 and the war in Gaza. He also said the internal culture at NPR had placed race and identity as “paramount in nearly every aspect of the workplace.”

Mr. Berliner’s essay has ignited a firestorm of criticism of NPR on social media, especially among conservatives who have long accused the network of political bias in its reporting. Former President Donald J. Trump took to his social media platform, Truth Social, to argue that NPR’s government funding should be rescinded, an argument he has made in the past.

NPR has forcefully pushed back on Mr. Berliner’s accusations and the criticism.

“We’re proud to stand behind the exceptional work that our desks and shows do to cover a wide range of challenging stories,” Edith Chapin, the organization’s editor in chief, said in an email to staff on Tuesday. “We believe that inclusion — among our staff, with our sourcing, and in our overall coverage — is critical to telling the nuanced stories of this country and our world.” Some other NPR journalists also criticized the essay publicly, including Eric Deggans, its TV critic, who faulted Mr. Berliner for not giving NPR an opportunity to comment on the piece.

In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Berliner expressed no regrets about publishing the essay, saying he loved NPR and hoped to make it better by airing criticisms that have gone unheeded by leaders for years. He called NPR a “national trust” that people rely on for fair reporting and superb storytelling.

“I decided to go out and publish it in hopes that something would change, and that we get a broader conversation going about how the news is covered,” Mr. Berliner said.

He said he had not been disciplined by managers, though he said he had received a note from his supervisor reminding him that NPR requires employees to clear speaking appearances and media requests with standards and media relations. He said he didn’t run his remarks to The New York Times by network spokespeople.

When the hosts of NPR’s biggest shows, including “Morning Edition” and “All Things Considered,” convened on Wednesday afternoon for a long-scheduled meet-and-greet with the network’s new chief executive, Katherine Maher , conversation soon turned to Mr. Berliner’s essay, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting. During the lunch, Ms. Chapin told the hosts that she didn’t want Mr. Berliner to become a “martyr,” the people said.

Mr. Berliner’s essay also sent critical Slack messages whizzing through some of the same employee affinity groups focused on racial and sexual identity that he cited in his essay. In one group, several staff members disputed Mr. Berliner’s points about a lack of ideological diversity and said efforts to recruit more people of color would make NPR’s journalism better.

On Wednesday, staff members from “Morning Edition” convened to discuss the fallout from Mr. Berliner’s essay. During the meeting, an NPR producer took issue with Mr. Berliner’s argument for why NPR’s listenership has fallen off, describing a variety of factors that have contributed to the change.

Mr. Berliner’s remarks prompted vehement pushback from several news executives. Tony Cavin, NPR’s managing editor of standards and practices, said in an interview that he rejected all of Mr. Berliner’s claims of unfairness, adding that his remarks would probably make it harder for NPR journalists to do their jobs.

“The next time one of our people calls up a Republican congressman or something and tries to get an answer from them, they may well say, ‘Oh, I read these stories, you guys aren’t fair, so I’m not going to talk to you,’” Mr. Cavin said.

Some journalists have defended Mr. Berliner’s essay. Jeffrey A. Dvorkin, NPR’s former ombudsman, said Mr. Berliner was “not wrong” on social media. Chuck Holmes, a former managing editor at NPR, called Mr. Berliner’s essay “brave” on Facebook.

Mr. Berliner’s criticism was the latest salvo within NPR, which is no stranger to internal division. In October, Mr. Berliner took part in a lengthy debate over whether NPR should defer to language proposed by the Arab and Middle Eastern Journalists Association while covering the conflict in Gaza.

“We don’t need to rely on an advocacy group’s guidance,” Mr. Berliner wrote, according to a copy of the email exchange viewed by The Times. “Our job is to seek out the facts and report them.” The debate didn’t change NPR’s language guidance, which is made by editors who weren’t part of the discussion. And in a statement on Thursday, the Arab and Middle Eastern Journalists Association said it is a professional association for journalists, not a political advocacy group.

Mr. Berliner’s public criticism has highlighted broader concerns within NPR about the public broadcaster’s mission amid continued financial struggles. Last year, NPR cut 10 percent of its staff and canceled four podcasts, including the popular “Invisibilia,” as it tried to make up for a $30 million budget shortfall. Listeners have drifted away from traditional radio to podcasts, and the advertising market has been unsteady.

In his essay, Mr. Berliner laid some of the blame at the feet of NPR’s former chief executive, John Lansing, who said he was retiring at the end of last year after four years in the role. He was replaced by Ms. Maher, who started on March 25.

During a meeting with employees in her first week, Ms. Maher was asked what she thought about decisions to give a platform to political figures like Ronna McDaniel, the former Republican Party chair whose position as a political analyst at NBC News became untenable after an on-air revolt from hosts who criticized her efforts to undermine the 2020 election.

“I think that this conversation has been one that does not have an easy answer,” Ms. Maher responded.

Benjamin Mullin reports on the major companies behind news and entertainment. Contact Ben securely on Signal at +1 530-961-3223 or email at [email protected] . More about Benjamin Mullin

Katie Robertson covers the media industry for The Times. Email:  [email protected]   More about Katie Robertson