Gautam >
> Perhaps I have been idealistic in thinking of tolerance as the opposite of
> intolerance, perhaps the word tolerance is not comprehensive enough when it
>
> comes to interaction (tolerance may be more "passive" action of non
> posters?- not
> firmly sure on this yet). (Looking back Jon did a better job than I
> pointing
> out the need for both respect and tolerance.) What I see lacking is
> respect
> for each other- one need not agree with a position, but at least respect
> the
> other person's ability to have an opinion different from you.
First we have to define what we mean by these words:
Tolerance:
To many americans I think tolerance means putting up with others differences
and accepting someone for what they intend, rather than how they come across
based one ones personal cultural norms.
In other macro cultures tolerance means trying to interact with others in
they way they expect based on the other's cultural norms.
Consider the example where onep erson (A) were to act so drasticaly different
that to another person (B) it would generaly be considred offensive.
1) If B were an American (or others who have the same model) B would most
likely ~be tolerant~ and first assume that not offense was intended.
2) However if B was rasied with another bodel of tolerance, B would likely
consider A to be intolerant and to be very offended. What is more if A in
this case was following the American model, A would mow find B to be
intolerant.
I think that this defines the American version of multi-culturalism often
refered to (and misunderstood) as a "melting-pot". The American model gives a
greatest common denominator result, while maintaining a high degree of
individuality.
The alternative "Multi-Cultural" model results in a least common denominator
result (much more in line with what many think when they hear "melting-pot")
and results in much less individuality.
You may disagree with this, but I think it provides a starting point from
which to discuss tolerance and what it means.
I think it might have something to do with the NA influences on my own
personal microculture, but I personaly fail to see how anyone has really been
~that~ intolerant.
It is hard to define the existance of a lack of respect for anothers
viewpoint. Clearly, simply restating already stated consept is a symptom, but
then one must diagnose and that is where it becouse dificult.
Consider an example where person (A) is restating something to person (B).
1) It may be that person (B) has not shown a good understanding of what (A)
said. (B) may not be respecting what A has to say, or may not be respecting
that what (A) has said may have important subtle differences to what (B) is
expecting. (B) may be purpously ignoring certain features of (A)'s consepts
or arguments. In short it may be a sign that (B)is lacking respect.
2) (A) could simply be ignoreing everything (B)sais and simply repeating. (A)
may be lacking respect.
Defining a lack of respect is more troublesome than it may at first appear.
While it may be more obvious that the lack of respect exists, it is not
necisarily obvious who specificaly is lacking respectfulness.
=====
_________________________________________________
Jan William Coffey
_________________________________________________
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
