Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Notre Dame, 2006. / Thesis directed by Alexandra F. Corning for the Department of Psychology. "May 2006." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 61-67).

From Introduction: It was a feature of South African political life to have senseless and continued political violence especially in areas such as KwaZulu Natal and Gauteng., There were certain places that were demarcated as "no-go areas" in other parts of the country for political rivals* This research has been directed by the cries of many South Africans pleading for political tolerance. Tolerance was a term used by both politicians and ordinary people alike and therefore open to misuse and various interpretations. As a term it was therefore without adequate clarification on its meaning. It is an attempt of this study to clarify and promote this value of tolerance. In Chapter One, the value of tolerance is examined. It is described as putting up with what is disliked or disapproved for the sake of others. But it is deliberate and is therefore a virtue. Positive attitudes, motives and power are central to tolerance. For tolerance to be sustained, solid foundations such as education, respect for others and their freedoms, democracy, justice, stability and reciprocity are to be laid. A light is also being shed on the limits of this virtue. Considerations and circumstances which need to be taken when deciding on each an action are the very motives and conditions for tolerance. This further makes the issue of tolerance to be complex. Church history shows that tolerance does not come naturally. It is a difficulty because of certain principles that are at stake. When viewed from the twentieth century perspective many of Church history's periods were of intolerance because the church had power. Tolerance was an exception, a plea of those without power. South Africa has to unlearn much of intolerance because of the past that militated against tolerance. Fortunately tolerance is now being firmly entrenched as law. Even though it is so, the tension of being tolerant and intolerant still exists especially in the whole area of abortion. Let us examine why tolerance is such a complex issue and a virtue to be promoted.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Wyoming, 2008. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on June 24, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 52-58).

Many high school communities across the United States grapple with issues of bullying, harassment and other forms of student conflict that are often the result of intolerance and misunderstandings across and among social identities (Griffin et. al., 2012). In an effort to rebuild tone and community, however, schools have focused predominantly on (1) addressing only antagonistic student behavior and (2) tolerance-based approaches that result in the superficial “choreography of civil speech” (Mayo. 2004). Both methods, in different ways, have struggled to meaningfully address many of the underlying issues responsible for intergroup and interpersonal conflict and the deterioration of community in schools (Dessel, 2010; Poteat & DiGiovanni, 2010). This qualitative case study examines the impact of an innovative arts-based curriculum designed to center the construction and performance of student “creative authoethnographies” in the classroom as a way of proactively working toward dialogue about identity and social analysis. Conducted over the course of a single school year at a high school in New York City, this research looks carefully at the experiences of seven students. Through close analysis of student interviews, archived student writing, curriculum documents, student surveys and other qualitative data, this work strives to articulate what courses such as these offer students, and how their presence in schools holds the potential to directly address issues of bullying and conflict across difference. Responding to the critical multiculturalist call (Banks, 1995, Morrell, 2007; Camangian, 2010) for a pedagogy that combines the successful but historically separate practices of autoethnography and the teaching of dialogue skills, this study introduces “cultural ruptures” and a “pedagogy of disruption” as part of a new approach to engaging young people in an of education that is explicit in it’s efforts to critique society and interrogate one’s own identity (Freire & Macedo, 1987). This research also advocates strongly on behalf of English classrooms (and English teachers specifically) as among the most important “actors” in the work of humanizing education, and offers tangible recommendations and strategies for practitioners toward that end.

The purpose of my research was to understand the role that the novel played in the development of religious toleration in eighteenth-century Britain. In my first chapter, I draw on an archive of polemical texts, legal documents, correspondence, sermons, and novels to reconstruct the historical and ideological transformations that occurred between the English Civil War (1642) and Catholic Emancipation (1829). I demonstrate the centrality of anti-Catholicism to the construction of British identity and arguments for the toleration of Protestant Dissenters. Throughout my dissertation, I argue that the novel served as a site for the articulation of new concepts and identities, and functioned as a mechanism for transforming readers’ subjectivities. One of the most important transformations to which the novel contributed was the elaboration of the concept of tolerance as a supplement to toleration. As an individual, private affect, tolerance depoliticizes religious difference, shifting emphasis away from the existential threat that toleration could potentially pose to the state and established church. The most surprising finding of my research was the extent to which novelists drew on a contemporary theological discourse of charity in developing this idea. My readings demonstrate the need for an understanding of secularization that would see it not only as a separation out of church and state, but also as a set of corresponding changes within religion, and a process whereby religious ideas are brought into what we normally think of as secular political ideas, like tolerance. Daniel Defoe plays a pivotal role in my dissertation, as both a prolific polemicist and one of the first novelists. My second chapter explores his polemical arguments for toleration, before moving on to examine how the political philosophy he develops in them informs the Robinson Crusoe novels (1719-1720). I argue that the liberty of conscience that Crusoe offers is tenuous and fragile in the first novel because of contradictions in Defoe’s political thought. In The Farther Adventures (1720), he is able to offer a more robust vision of toleration, by placing the relationship of charity between the Protestant Crusoe and a French priest at the center of his novel. In chapter three I shift my focus to the formal features of the Crusoe novels, arguing that the first novel urges its readers to undergo a series of identifications that lead them toward the charitable tolerance that the second novel thematizes. The second novel disperses the narrative function between characters, highlighting the role of perspective in religious knowledge. My fourth chapter argues that in Sir Charles Grandison (1753), Samuel Richardson demonstrates that tolerance can function as a bulwark, rather than a threat, to British identity. Richardson simultaneously offers a positive representation of Catholic characters and shows how tolerance in the face of intolerance can found a new identity secured by a dynamic of moral and epistemological condescension. My final chapter turns to an exploration of how the Gothic novel could mediate changes in the political and ideological context at the end of the eighteenth century, as toleration was first being extended to Catholics in Britain. I argue that Lusignan (1801) represents Catholic monasticism in a way that makes it not only newly tolerable, but also newly desirable for British readers. At the same time, the novel demonstrates more forcibly than any of the preceding texts, the secularizing negotiations that not only Catholicism, but religion itself, underwent during the increasing modernization and liberalization of Britain through the eighteenth century.

John Rawls's The Law of Peoples has been criticized for focusing on the interests of peoples rather than individuals and for compromising individuals' fundamental human rights in order to tolerate nonliberal ideas of justice. This dissertation develops a new political liberal approach to international justice theory that responds to these concerns. This approach gives explicit moral primacy to the individual while also upholding the political liberal commitment to toleration. I do this by developing a political conception of the person specifically for international justice theory and a global original position of persons for working out principles of international justice. This involves the specification of an idea of freedom that is not parochially liberal and the development of a new political liberal human rights framework. This dissertation does not offer a defense of political liberalism as the right account of justice; the aim of this work is to consider whether a political liberal theory of international justice is able to give the individual moral primacy and to explore how it might do so.

John Rawls's The Law of Peoples has been criticized for focusing on the interests of peoples rather than individuals and for compromising individuals' fundamental human rights in order to tolerate nonliberal ideas of justice. This dissertation develops a new political liberal approach to international justice theory that responds to these concerns. This approach gives explicit moral primacy to the individual while also upholding the political liberal commitment to toleration. I do this by developing a political conception of the person specifically for international justice theory and a global original position of persons for working out principles of international justice. This involves the specification of an idea of freedom that is not parochially liberal and the development of a new political liberal human rights framework. This dissertation does not offer a defense of political liberalism as the right account of justice; the aim of this work is to consider whether a political liberal theory of international justice is able to give the individual moral primacy and to explore how it might do so.

Toleration is a core liberal ideal, but it is not an ideal without limits. To tolerate the intolerant would be to violate the principles and purposes underlying liberal societies. This important exception to the liberal ideal of toleration is dangerous, however, in that we may make it too exclusionary in practice. That is, we may mistakenly apply it to peaceful, beneficial members of our communities as well as to the truly intolerant. In particular, some contemporary liberals see religion either as inherently intolerant and dangerous or as violating standards of public discourse that they feel are necessary to uphold liberalism's core ideals, including toleration. This work argues that we risk violating the liberal ideal of toleration in a hasty over-generalization about religious belief. Through an examination of the arguments of Roger Williams and John Locke, this work argues that religious belief can be compatible with toleration, and that the practice and popular value of liberal toleration has at least in part a religious origin. These authors, and believers like them, defended toleration, partially as a result of their own experiences of intolerance, but also because they saw toleration as a theological necessity. Thus, this work shows that we have misunderstood the relationship between religion and toleration. While some forms of religious belief may incite intolerance and violence, others provide a firm foundation for toleration. We must show care in distinguishing the two to avoid violating the fundamental liberal ideal of toleration. Moreover, it is important that we do so to foster civil comity and cooperation, as well as to sustain the other benefits that religious groups provide to liberal, democratic societies.

The problem of any political system is that the principles which underlie and characterize it might also, through their application, endanger it and bring about its destruction. Democracy is no exception. Moreover, because democracy is a relatively young phenomenon, it lacks experience in dealing with pitfalls involved in the working of the system. This is what I call the "catch" of democracy. The primary aims of this research are (1) to formulate percepts and mechanisms designed to prescribe boundaries to liberty and tolerance conducive to safeguard democracy; and (2) in the light of the theory to analyze a case of a democratic selfdefence. Hence, I employ the formulated philosophical principles to the study of the Israeli democracy, evaluating the political and legal measures to which it resorted in its struggle against Kahanism. In the first part of the thesis I examine two of the main arguments which are commonly offered as answers to the question: 'why tolerate?' The first is the 'Respect for Others Argument', and the second is the 'Argument from Truth'. I introduce some qualifications to these arguments, asserting that our primary obligation should be given to the first, and that in case of conflict between the two principles, this former principle should have preference over the latter. Through the review of the Millian theory and some more recent theories I try to prescribe confines to liberty. With regard to freedom of expression, I state two arguments: the first under the Harm Principle, and the second under the Offence Principle. Under the Harm Principle I argue that restrictions on liberty may be prescribed when there are sheer threats of immediate violence against some individuals or groups. Under the Offence Principle I explicate that expressions which intend to inflict psychological offence are morally on a par with physical harm and therefore there are grounds for abridging them. In this connection, I review the Illinois Supreme Court decision, which permitted the Nazis to hold a demonstration in Skokie. Moving from theory to practice, in the second part I apply the theory and the conclusions reached to the Israeli democracy, observing its struggle against the Kahanist phenomenon as it has been developed through the last two decades, and increasingly following the election of Meir Kahane to the Knesset in 1984. I examine the mechanisms applied in this anti-'Kach' (Kahane's party) campaign, the justifications given for the limitations that were set, and how justified they were, according to the formulated philosophical and legal guidelines.