Howmany times do we hear of tolerance here at Dartmouth? There are many places where this word can be encountered, and we often use it without reflecting on exactly what we mean when we say it. Professors, letters to the Editor of The Dartmouth, conversations and freshman orientation all tell us to be tolerant individuals.
This is a misguided notion and not one that should be encouraged by a liberal arts education. There are not many people that one can encounter at Dartmouth who would claim to be against "tolerance."
We can tolerate long lines while waiting in line for food; we can tolerate annoying individuals; we can even tolerate Phil Donahue, or at least we can shut him off. But there are certain things that we should not tolerate.
Why does it seem as if there is such separation among groups on campus? These could be split along lines of race, religion or political outlook, but let's not pretend that there is not a great divide among the many groups on campus. The greatest force perpetuating this divide is "tolerance".
C.S. Lewis wrote in "That Hideous Strength," "Those who are enjoying something, or suffering something together, are companions. Those who enjoy or suffer one another are not." This thought applies to our life here at Dartmouth; are we sharing common experiences or are we suffering one another? Instead of looking for common ground, we suffer one another, or worse yet, we tolerate one another.
Perhaps this is a bit extreme. Maybe a better way to look at this issue is to reflect on the extent to which our capacity and desire for understanding has been usurped by our lukewarm, non-judgmental and patronizing "tolerance." Does this mean we should all be intolerant? This word has many negative connotations, but if intolerance means speaking out against what we believe to be wrong, actually having opinions and daring to voice them, then perhaps we should ask ourselves if intolerance is such a bad thing.
We accept some views and we do not accept others. We accept some actions and we do not accept others. This is not dangerous. Many agree up to that point, but have trouble when other people go around telling others that what they are doing is wrong. This can be a problem for some, and while it is not beneficial to simply shout back and forth on an issue, would they suggest that silence is better?
As far as tolerance goes, its domain has extended too far. When we tolerate an idea and refuse to understand or pass judgment on it, we are really saying that we just don't care. Let's grapple with each other's ideas, agree with them or disagree with them, but let us not advocate the empty doctrine of "tolerance" which refuses to take interest.
It is said that society would cease to function if there were no tolerance, and perhaps this is the case, since there are certain things that we just have to put up with. Some would be delighted if society progressively became more and more tolerant of all actions and ideologies.
This is completely abhorrent. What we accept and reject says a great deal about what we value and believe in. Mere toleration without judgment is madness and mindless.
