Authors

  • Muhabbat Jumayeva
    Navoiy state University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71337/inlibrary.uz.jmsi.111677

Abstract

X


background image

https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi

volume 4, issue 4, 2025

875

THEORY OF TOLERANCE: CONCEPT AND PRINCIPLES

Jumayeva Muhabbat Mustakimovna

Navoiy state University

PhD candidate at the Department of English Linguistics

Philosophy as a science performs methodological functions in relation to the other branches of

the social sciences at all times. Every historical period due to the deep and strong changes in the

life of society is characterized by the manifestation of the eternal philosophical problems that

have been updated in form and content. By virtue of diligence of responsive and talented

philosophers put forward constructive ideas, develop new paradigms imposed effective ways and

means to address vital issues. Of course, because of objective and subjective reasons, not all

philosophical views, and do not always produce the expected results. However, undoubtedly, that

the development of philosophical thought provides a powerful impetus, serves as a solid premise

for the emergence of new philosophical theories, most of which today appear as a relatively

independent social science.
The analysis shows that within the scope of modern science of philosophy researches are

developing intensively and systematically on the issue of tolerance. So, for the past quarter of a

century in the post-Soviet republics have been defended more than 500 theses for a variety of

humanities, which reveals different aspects of the multifaceted phenomenon of tolerance. In this

connection, of course, continually increasing the quantity of interpretations of the term, the

subject of research expands. Of course, it must bound to happen, because, diversity of ideas and

opinions, the availability of alternative visions creates an atmosphere of pluralism in science, that

is the primary condition for the development of philosophical thought.
Within the scope of one article it is practically impossible to analyze all the currently existing

interpretations of tolerance. However, we consider it expedient to pay attention to some of them.

In one collective monograph tolerance is defined like that: ‘Tolerance is inherently socio-cultural

phenomenon that includes knowledge and estimates of ‘other’ and ‘another’ values, as well as

practical activities based on them’. This argument is of a general nature and, at the same time,

needs to be improved. ‘Tolerance – a clear manifestation of respect for different opinions, beliefs,

world culture, the perception of human values based on sufferance, as well as individual rights,

aimed at the expression of his self’ – M. Hazhieva writes like this This definition, on the one

hand, purport to be comprehensiveness, but on the other hand, it is seen that there clearly

observed in the logical sequence definition structuring provisions.
I. G. Artsybashev, the specialist on issues of tolerance, is inclined to such an approach, which in

his view, is characterized by the perception of critical tolerance. And from this point of view, the

concept is defined as follows: ‘a manifestation of a low socio-psychological sensitivity of the

individual to the ‘otherness’, up to indifference; an ideology that claims to be the universal

means of regulation of social and cultural relationships, spiritual needs, based on double

standards, do not accept the pluralism of opinion forming in the mind of the individual

indifference to manifestations of immorality does not coincide with the ethics of human

solidarity; formal relationship to another entity, is estimated as an inevitable but useful ‘evil’;

tolerance of others, devoid of love and compassion; that somewhere between full adoption and


background image

https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi

volume 4, issue 4, 2025

876

persecution; relative value, as may be the outward manifestation of goodwill only when humility

with the behavior, beliefs and values of others; the concept is not suggesting a clear boundary

between good and evil; the way to the loss of the elements of their cultural identity .Scientific

evaluation of scientific manifestations of this phenomenon from different angles deserves

attention, but, in our opinion, this interpretation does not correspond to the true essence of this

creative phenomenon of tolerance, since this approach, it appears as a kind of state of

marginalization at a time when we all know that tolerance – a vigilant, active, purposeful stance.
According to N. G. Stepanova, tolerance is a ‘positive attitude in the public consciousness that

determines the productive activity of the relationship between different cultures’ . Tolerance – a

huge phenomenon, a social occurrence, which occurs in all spheres of society and at all levels of

relations between actors. From this point of view, in our opinion, unpromising interpretation of

tolerance as a positive installation makes sense only between different cultures.
E. N. Tretyakova’s opinion on this issue provokes interest. ‘Tolerance we consider as the

spiritual and moral quality of a person, expressed in the adoption of the ‘other’ as an individual,

taking it regardless of nationality, language, attitude to religion, beliefs, membership of voluntary

organizations, social, property and official status (social and cultural characteristics), as well as

age, health, sex, race (anthropological characteristics)’ , – she says. It is remarkable that a

scientist analyzing tolerance as a moral quality, as a result of long and complex educational

process, and as a basic characteristic of the individual. And, by this the author reveals perfectly

many specific features of tolerance.
One of the following definitions formulated as follows: ‘Tolerance is the natural socio-cultural

norm, positive attitude to the individual in relation to the surrounding differentiated society,

consisting of the construction-friendly assessment of others and refusal to confront. In studies of

K. V. Vasylyuk we see quite a detailed analysis of tolerance. Particularly, the scientist proposes

to divide tolerance into the types: ‘the first type can be called tolerance to the others, and the

second – tolerance of development, the third – tolerance of adoption, and the fourth – the limit of

tolerance.’ In developing her idea, she argues that ‘tolerance typology allows us to formulate a

simplified diagram types and suggest the hypothesis that the transition from the first to the

second type of tolerance is a universal prerequisite for the resolution of conflicts in the existence

of human being. It is sufficiently for everyday life.
Besides the above mentioned there are hundreds of definitions, each of which can be and, when

it is appropriate, need to be critically evaluated. However, together they draw a general picture of

the modern theory of tolerance and each of them shows certain inalienable truths of the total

tolerance.
As a consequence of such a powerful trend in philosophical science, we were invited to a certain

vision of problems as well. In particular, which emerged in 2014, in The Encyclopedic

Dictionary of Tolerance, we proposed the following definition of the concept. ‘Tolerance – the

central concept of the philosophy of tolerance, reflecting the open, sincere, disinterested,

gratuitous, impartial relationship among people, social groups, peoples, nations, states and others.

Subjects of social relationships based on attention, respect, friendship, love, indulgence,

sympathy, solidarity, mutual interest, equality, justice, tolerance, etc. high moral qualities’

[Kushaev U. R. and Doroshina I. G. In addition, it was used and analyzed certain expressions,

which in our opinion, can serve as a methodological principles of the philosophy of tolerance.

Let us consider some of them.
‘The right to be the other’ – the principle of tolerance, denoting the need to recognize and respect

individual social actors, unlike other traits of people, social groups, communities, ethnic groups,

nations, states, and etc, and a forbearing attitude towards them. It is right in tune with the natural


background image

https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi

volume 4, issue 4, 2025

877

and positive right. With this principle combines harmoniously with another principle of tolerance

‘unity in diversity’, which is a real triumph of compliance with this right. The principle of ‘right

to be the other’ includes the following basic points:
– Availability of the necessary conditions for the realization of their creative abilities;
– Creating opportunities for self-expression, self-realization;
– The right to express alternative views, opinions and beliefs;
– To promote co-existence on an equal and equitable basis among other races, nationalities and

peoples of other cultures carriers;
– Support and promote the full communication, dialogue, contact between different people,

groups and cultures;
– Free use of the material and spiritual values along with others regardless of gender, race,

religion, language, culture and social background and so on.
Everyone from his or her birth realizes individuality, uniqueness, owns special genetic,

physiological traits, inherited from their ancestors and their own, unlike any one soul. And in the

process of formation of identity, socialization, along with common to all the knowledge and

skills available and developing new complements the individual characteristics that are unique to

him. In other words, the social life of the person in the course of life takes on a very motley

picture, but it is a unique characteristic of the man. The object and subject of the principle of ‘the

right to be the other’ serve all social structures, and this right must be observed by all social

actors, but in this case we can talk about tolerance and indulgence [Kushaev U. R. and Doroshina

I. G.
The next principle of tolerance philosophy advocates the idea of 'me and the other’. This

principle denotes an approach to interpersonal relations in the process of realization of the

individual's place in the social interaction and the importance of the characteristics, and the

consequent understanding of the place, the differences between moral and cultural property of

another, his own kind of man. ‘Me and the other’ is a common formula that allows us to identify

the object of tolerance actions, behavior, attitudes and relationships at the interpersonal level of

interaction. As the ‘other’ can serve any person who is different traits, patterns of behavior,

gender, age, race, nationality, religion, social origin, and etc.
The significance of this scheme is that the awareness of the subject itself, and ‘other’ is an initial,

fundamental step in the formation of his specific relation to the people around. In this regard, we

can say that the time of this state coincides with the individual's awareness of his ‘me’. However,

a clear distinction between him and others, of course, does not fully mean of tolerance towards

others. This determined notion acquires the level of importance of moral culture and education,

social mobility, activity and communication skills of the individual. The notion ‘me and the

other’ as a synthesis of the necessary concepts, knowledge and experience involves a certain

level of social consciousness of the individual. Thus, the cognition of the other, some people

improved with the development of moral, aesthetic, legal, political, ideological, economic, and

other forms of human consciousness.
Among other things, knowing their place and the place of the ‘other’ in a certain social

environment, cultural environment and society in general, a person begins to rationally

understand the involvement in the events taking place around him. This, in succession, promotes

feelings of harmony, solidarity and cooperation, which are the guarantee of stability, bearable

and tolerant relations between people [Kushaev U. R. and Doroshina I. G.


background image

https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi

volume 4, issue 4, 2025

878

This main principle of the philosophy of tolerance means, on the one hand, cultural integrity, the

unity of mankind, on the other hand, its diversity in cultural terms. Democracy, ensuring basic

human rights and freedoms and other universal principles of nature give a new impetus to the

process of ethnic, national self-expressions of the peoples of the world. Taking into account that

currently there are more than 3000 ethnic groups, peoples and nations, and the number of

countries reaching over 200, we can say that this process will be prolonged and difficult, because

the peoples of the world are at different levels of development and have different opportunities to

build their own independent states.
It should be noted that the national cultures are the basis of human values. However, national

culture does not disappear, and in the framework of universal values manifests itself more

brightly. It is common knowledge that if the nuclear arsenal will be applied by the world

countries owning them, it is theoretically enough power to destroy the Earth's biosphere several

times. In addition, the exacerbation of unhealthy in terms of tolerance by the existing ethnic and

religious differences and conflicts artificially make useless all the efforts of individual nations

and hundreds of international organizations, to ensure equality, fairness and transparency in the

relationship. It indicates that the awareness of all cultures themselves as a unique manifestation

of a single human civilization is determined by objective and subjective circumstances.
Openness, great attention to other cultures, respectful, tolerant attitude towards them are

important requirements tolerant scope of the today’s world. A careful study of each other, the

establishment of mutual contacts aimed at partnership and cooperation contribute to the

rapprochement of cultural values, the expansion of the interaction, mutual influence. There is no

any way to the peaceful coexistence of all peoples of mankind except continuous improvement

of the level of culture of tolerance. In this context, the meaning of a culture of tolerance is put on

the same footing as the meaning of the concept of a culture of peace.
Integration processes, the development of mass media, information technology, on the one hand,

are a strong factor of close interaction of cultures of the world, on the other hand, they as

opportunities and the resources are used for selfish purposes – to provoke inter-ethnic, inter-

religious conflicts, the usage of ethnic and religious factors in the implementation of geopolitical

interests, and so on. And modern realities require mankind to promote tolerant relationships

between different cultures. These various convenient facilities, resources, science and technology

should be used for peaceful purposes – to strengthen the friendly ties between the peoples and

nations to develop new effective mechanisms of intercultural dialogue, to open new ways to the

mutual enrichment of cultural values and, thus, to expand the horizons of the scope of tolerance

on a world scale.
All must be more deeply realized that the culture of one or another nation, nationalities cannot

achieve progress without interaction with the universal human values, to the success of world

science and technology. Today, the socio-economic development, material and spiritual progress

of all peoples and nations based on general social patterns of complementarity and mutual

enrichment. In this regard, ‘the unity and diversity of cultures’ in favor of the central category of

the philosophy of tolerance, which is a fruitful cooperation between people, nations, ethnic

groups towards a common cultural progress [Kushaev U. R. and Doroshina I. G
Thus, the above-listed principles allow consider and interpret the social behavior of the subject in

relation to each other in terms of tolerance, as well as most clearly reveal the objective and

subjective assessment of the behavior of the various social forces. Additionally, it should be

noted that the principles of tolerance are most effective when they interact with new paradigms

of general philosophical theory, the formation of which, of course, dictated by the acute global

problems of present time, including questions relating to the theory of tolerance that have a


background image

https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi

volume 4, issue 4, 2025

879

special place.

Literature:

Arcybashev I. G. Cennostnaja al'ternativnost' religioznoj tolerantnosti i veroterpimosti: rossijskij

opyt: avtoref. dis.… kand. filos. nauk: 09.00. 13. – Ekaterinburg, 2008. – 235 s.
Ochildiev A. Baғrikenglik – barқarorlik va taraққijot omili. – Toshkent : Toshkent islom

universiteti, 2007.
Vasiljuk K. V. Tolerantnost' v simvolicheskom potreblenii. Dissertacija na soiskanie uchenoj

stepeni kandidata filosofskih nauk. – Omsk, 2014.

Tursunovna, Z. Z. (2021). The use authentic materials in esp classrooms.

Asian journal of

multidimensional research

,

10

(4), 114-119.

Kushaev U. R., Doroshina I. G. Tolerantnost': jenciklopedicheskij slovar'. – Penza : Nauchno-

izdatel'skij centr «Sociosfera», 2014. – 484 s.

References

Arcybashev I. G. Cennostnaja al'ternativnost' religioznoj tolerantnosti i veroterpimosti: rossijskij opyt: avtoref. dis.… kand. filos. nauk: 09.00. 13. – Ekaterinburg, 2008. – 235 s.

Ochildiev A. Baғrikenglik – barқarorlik va taraққijot omili. – Toshkent : Toshkent islom universiteti, 2007.

Vasiljuk K. V. Tolerantnost' v simvolicheskom potreblenii. Dissertacija na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni kandidata filosofskih nauk. – Omsk, 2014.

Tursunovna, Z. Z. (2021). The use authentic materials in esp classrooms. Asian journal of multidimensional research, 10(4), 114-119.

Kushaev U. R., Doroshina I. G. Tolerantnost': jenciklopedicheskij slovar'. – Penza : Nauchno-izdatel'skij centr «Sociosfera», 2014. – 484 s.

Important Links

sidebarmenu

Author Guidelines Peer Review Process Publication Ethics Copyright Notice Author APC Plagiarism Policy Open Access Policy

dbn

Latest publications

Atom logo

RSS2 logo

RSS1 logo

Information

For Readers

For Authors

For Librarians

Make a Submission

Address