2007-11-30 14:46:02 · 10 answers · asked by Trina™ 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Tolerance is often reluctantly accepting something you don't really agree with. many societies built on this have simmering tensions, under a false harmony.
Understanding is always better. Even if you still can't agree, no-one can claim you are ignorant afterwards.
2007-11-30 14:53:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I would say that they are not the same thing, and you do not have to have understanding to have tolerance. There is such a thing as forced tolerance. Many people put up with things they do not understand. Many people understand things they do not tolerate. I know why members of my staff come in late sometimes. I completely understand it, but I do not tolerate tardiness at all.
I think we need both. I think we also need intolerance. I will never tolerate drunk driving. Both have their uses.
2007-11-30 23:29:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Neither, the answer is harmony.
Tolerance is judgmental and has negative connotations. It implies power and control. I tolerate you. I allow you to be. I have control. Should I decide to stop tolerating you, then you must change or…
Understanding is good, but not realistic. It requires each to be open and willing to learn.
Harmony is the answer. A blending of each, all different, yet similar. Each existing unfettered, contributing to the whole. It requires each part only to be.
2007-11-30 23:24:27 · answer #3 · answered by southcaligirl1 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Tolerance implies a 'superiority'. For example: 'I will tolerate your misbehavior for only brief periods'. Thus, tolerance implies an inherent or perceived differential between two or more people. It is based on bias.
Understanding has real value. It narrows the gap between two people - bringing them closer together. It has the power to resolve differences.
I choose understanding.
Thanks for a question that stimulates thinking! Best wishes.
2007-11-30 22:55:34 · answer #4 · answered by Doctor J 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Understanding, because, the basic element of understanding is tolerance.
2007-12-01 02:50:33 · answer #5 · answered by ADS 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's a false dichotomy. You can certainly have both. In fact, I would argue that understanding is a prerequisite for tolerance. And tolerance of (or openness to) new concepts is required for understanding.
2007-11-30 22:51:02 · answer #6 · answered by R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Understanding. If one can . If not then tolerance.
2007-12-01 01:15:55 · answer #7 · answered by Mogollon Dude 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Tolerance automatically follows understanding.
Intolerance is an attribute of ego. Once the 'I' is understood, the ego dies along with intolerance.
2007-11-30 23:13:34 · answer #8 · answered by A.V.R. 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Overcoming
2007-11-30 22:50:12 · answer #9 · answered by aaron.brake 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Both.
2007-11-30 22:58:49 · answer #10 · answered by Sophrosyne 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋