I think answers would greatly depend on the prerequisite context of the existing conversation, which we don’t really have here. So I’m going to talk in very broad-stroke emotions, based on what I feel, because the fact is there are two very different definitions of tolerance, and mine comes very much up on the dark side of things. I also very much speak as an individual.
The word “tolerance” itself has always carried a negative connotation for me. It seems steeped in unwillingness – even though some dictionary definitions state verbatim ‘the willingness to tolerate’ (particularly the existence of things). In other definitions, the term ‘endure’ crops up, another word carrying a more negative than positive feeling for me, that you are ‘subject’ to something you simply must ‘bear’ in order to move forward.
I suppose tolerance feels much like the bare minimum humans can possibly provide to a world swathed in broad and beautiful diversity. In general, I just don’t find tolerance goes far enough. It begs no such ideas of learning, broadening of horizons, and I’d disagree that it carries by default any aspect of respect, recognition, or understanding either. Even growth is not required; actually, I’d suggest it’s more akin to stagnation. Tolerance is the ability to sit and withstand a thing, maybe over and over, without ever needing to become more than what you are. Tolerance is to endure pain, hardship, and survive. But mere survival does not make us better (despite the old adage) all on its own, and the basic pre-requisite of tolerance can be simple apathy, or even ignorance.
All that out of the way, I’m not going to deny tolerance is a start. It’s the first step (maybe not even that, more like a pre-step, a baby step, a leaning in the general direction of something better). But Ultimately when I hear someone ‘tolerates’ something, it sounds more like they’re working through a stomach cramp than anything, and that’s a “meh” experience at best.
Is tolerance limited to the religious domain or is it present in other areas of life?
Tolerance is in absolutely every aspect of our lives, the fact that it is in the religious or spiritual life is as a result nearly unavoidable and completely unsurprising. It is not special, religious tolerance. It’s just another form of “the bare minimum”. Tolerating the beliefs of others is not respect, dignity, knowledge, and some people mistakenly think it’s power for some reason (as though we have any right to “permit” something’s existence or not, particularly when the something is a human being’s rights or even their very existence).
As for it being simple or difficult, I think it is one of the easiest things a human can do, since all you need to do, is do nothing at all.
What are the limits of tolerance according to you?
Something that intentionally sets out to harm. If I define tolerance as ‘the bare minimum’, there is certainly not even that for something that is intentionally out to hurt people, but because tolerance is so darn simple, the cure for that is nothing less than action (against that which is intentionally setting out to harm). Otherwise, if you simply let something be even while it harms others, that is just another level of tolerance.
What can we design together to promote this value?
I don’t think I want to promote it. Instead, I want to break it down, and promote the individual values we assign to tolerance:
- Knowledge
- Growth
- Understanding
- Respect
- Recognition
- Interaction
- Communication
- Bridge-building
- etc.
I never want to simply tolerate something, or someone. That’s not a goal for me. That would for me feel like settling for less. I think the way I’ve grown up and lived my life heavily influences the way I see this word. I am sure other people have much broader meanings that ring true for them, and that’s perfectly fine. But for me, I’d rather replace the word all together if for no other reason than it can be taken in such starkly different ways.
But that may be more about how people interpret the idea and less about what it should be in spirit.