About tolerance

[PsychoDad]

Recently, I had the wonderful opportunity to talk with a wonderful Holocaust survivor by the name of Eva Kor at the Terre Haute Candles Holocaust memorial, and she said something that has had a deep impact upon me and I think I will take it to the grave. (I'm paraphrasing here due to my lack of memory.}

" I don't want tolerance, I want respect, and I want respect for my rights as a human being. Think about this, do you simply ant to be 'tolerated', or do you want to be respected? Respected as a fellow human being, as I respect all my fellow human beings."

What are some of your thoughts about this? Should we as progressives be preaching tolerance, or should we preach and teach respect? Are they both similar, do they go hand in hand?

Does one follow the other? Which comes first?

Would you rather be tolerated or respected?

Peace.

[lvx35]

1. What a cool thing.

I had the pleasure of helping a holocaust survivor while working in a nursing home when I was younger...It takes an incredible person to live through that kind of thing.

You bring up an interesting point. Tolerance and respect are different, but I for one think that tolerance must come first, because respect is up to the individual. For instance, take the veiling of women in muslim culture. Do you respect that tradition? Certain feminist perspectives don't respect that at all. But I think its important to tolerate that as a cultural tradition and not impose our own values on it, because often muslim women don't respect what the see as sexual objectivization of our women in the media (through nakedness) and see the veil as resistance to that.

the point is, respect is about respecting what somebody is doing. Tolerance is about respecting their freedom to do it, though you may not agree with what they are doing. I think tolerance is essential, but respect is a matter of opinion. :)

[Igel]

2. First, some definitions.

Tolerance (1): a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry (there are others, I'll content myself with this one)

Respect (1): esteem for or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality or ability, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or ability

Respect (2): deference to a right, privilege, privileged position, or someone or something considered to have certain rights or privileges; proper acceptance or courtesy; acknowledgment

Civility: courtesy; politenes. Courtesy: a courteous, respectful, or considerate act or expression

Given the circularity and overlap, it's no wonder that people semantically bleach 'respect' to mean 'civility' or 'courtesy.' But the bleaching seems to make it difficult to hold a coherent thought sometimes.

I extend civility to those I meet; I expect it in return. I keep open the possibility of respect (1), but it's simply not there at first. Courtesy *requires* respect (2). Respect (2) is what Kor had to intend. Respect (1) is what most people want to receive. They offer respect (2) (believing it to be respect (1)), but really do demand respect (1). The insecure demand to be liked and esteemed. Some cultures confuse the two; in principle they are distinct, at least in most Western cultures.

Intolerance is a massive violation of courtesy. I am intolerant of some groups, but by and large do not show my intolerance; they have no way of knowing this, however, since (a) courtesy veils it and (b) my religious beliefs are such that I may undertake no action based upon my intolerance. My academic training, however, dictates that I make some distinctions explicit. Horns of a dilemma, resolved by allowing any offense to be primarily the other person's inference.

In many instances, 'tolerance' has a negative connotation, conditional tolerance based upon compliance by some relatively powerless group with the requirements of a more powerful group. Permission can be implicit in the verb. Some groups 'tolerate' rituals of a different faith, as long as they're not public, and do not offend the dominant group's sensibilities--one can hardly say that the submissive group is 'tolerating' the dominant group. Tolerance *can* have an implicit power relationship; do as we say, or we will be intolerant. This is a different view of tolerance, one not usually recorded, but often present in practice. This tolerance, tolerance (2), is abominable.

The distinctions between (1) and (2) for respect and tolerance are needed to make sense of Kor, IMHO.

[undergroundpanther]

3. Respected

But what about those who have no respect for human beings and are unwilling to learn how,and think themselves are the only ones deservingof respect?

Some people like nazi psychopaths will not respect human life and so they are incompatible with life.I cannot respect or even tolerate someone who wants me dead or to not exist.

[sandnsea]

4. Respect is misinterpreted as feared

I don't think people use the word 'tolerance' as a substitute for 'put up with it'. I think people don't use respect because too many people use it as a demand of obedience, like a parent demanding respect when what they're really doing is intimidating their child into silent obedience. I think tolerance means acceptance, and that's really all we can ask of each other. Respect has to be based on character to mean anything.

[LWolf]

5. It's all in the interpretation, isn't it?

There are some good points made on this thread about definition. Respect is not fear, although it's used that way too often. Tolerance is not "putting up with," although it's used that way, as well. Common usage leads to a shift in accepted meaning.

Tolerance can imply a begrudging kind of acceptance. Respect is vital, yet only addresses surface behavior in many cases.

I prefer "appreciation." I think we should appreciate differences, acknowledging that our differences add richness to our world.