Tolerance and World Peace

Tolerance and World Peace What is the meaning of tolerance or world peace? Tolerance is the ability to the fundamental of other cultures without using individuals or own culture to compare others. World peace is the freedom, peace, and happiness between all nations and people. The two articles, “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism” by Martha Nussbaum and “Don’t Forget the Little Plattons” by Michael McConnel, explains the tolerance and cultures. In my own understanding from the 2 articles, I think patriotism is opposite from the tolerance.

However, the more patriotic the citizen is towards their own country, they will become less tolerant of other cultures. Nussbaum argues that all citizens should act cosmopolitanism to be sure there are truth, peace and justice in the world. Everyone should be able to “come together as a single body”1 (Nussbaum 1996, 10) to unite with other fellow human beings and not categorize each other into groups. This will lead to an increase of world peace. There is a quote when Nussbaum agree with this, “It is this community that is, fundamentally, the source of our moral obligations.

With respect to the most basic moral values, such as justice, ‘We should regard all human beings as our fellow citizens and neighbors’. We should regard our deliberations as, first and foremost, deliberations about human problems of people in particular concrete situations, not problems growing out of a national identity that is altogether unlike that of others. “ 2 (Nussbaum 1996, 7) This quote is referring to when the human that are living in the world today should observe being as a citizen for their country and neighbours within their community.

Order custom essay Tolerance and World Peace with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

When the citizen is devoting himself to the nation, it is most likely for the person to be more ignorant of the values and rights to be followed around the world. This is why there is no world peace because citizen would rather to focus on his or her own values and rights. There are other options for students as an advantage to be learning about other cultures and beliefs. “As students here grow up, is it sufficient for them to learn that they are above all citizens of the United States but that they ought to respect the basic human rights of citizens of India, Bolivia, Nigeria and Norway…” 3 (Nussbaum 1996, 6)

To bring changes to the tolerance level of nationalities is the students to be taught that they are the citizens of the world, not the citizen of their country. If the teachers in school taught the students more about other cultures from different countries this will build more tolerance education in the students. They would have better understanding of their beliefs and cultures and also others too. This will benefit a difference within the nationalities about tolerance.

There are three arguments for the second concept of education from the Stoics that Nussbaum explain about tolerance and a bit of world peace. Firstly, “they hold that they study of humanity as it is realized in the whole world is valuable for self-knowledge: we see ourselves more clearly when we see our ways in relation to those of other reasonable people. ”4 (Nussbaum 1996, 8) I agree with him because we are here in this world for a reason, we are here to learn about the world as one society, world peace.

World peace will make it easier for people to relate to others to expand more self-knowledge like self-actualization. Secondly, “…that we will be better table to solve our problems if we face them in this way. ”5 (Nussbaum 1996, 8) This is true because looking in the past of the history from different politics has been cause from assassinations and wars. The best example is Hilter and his Nazi army when they try to take over Europe by killing people that are different such as being black, disable, Jews and more. We try to avoid these dangers by decreasing large groups in the world community.

Finally, they talk about that “…stance of the kosmou polites is intrinsically valuable, for it recognizes in people what is especially fundamental about them, most worthy of respect and acknowledgement…” 6 (Nussbaum 1996, 8) If the world is seen as one society or entity, citizen will be tolerance about their cultural difference. They will focus more on what they would have in common. “These qualities may be less colourful than local or national traditions and identities…” 7 (Nussbaum 1996, 8) We as individual still keep our culture, traditions, religion, and ethnicity even though the world is going to unite as one society.

Even though the world comes together as world peace, it does not represent that we will not be able to undefined ourselves of whom we are. The point of this is to not separate each citizen from our community we are part of. But, we should hold the humanity that is part of it. This is how we should visualize ourselves as, “Our task as citizens of the world will be to draw the circles somehow toward the center. Making all human beings more like our fellow city-dwellers, and so on. We need to give up our special affections and identifications, whether ethnic or gender-based or religious.

We need not think of them as superficial, and we may think for our identity as constituted partly by them. ” 8 (Nussbaum 1996, 9) When I read Nussbaum’s article, I thought ‘ Isn’t Nussbaum being to self-centered? ’ But when I over read it again I understood her arguments and points she was pointing out relating to tolerance. On the other hand, McConnell’s article had also suitable points he wanted to argue about. With McConnell’s point, I agree to what he is explaining about tolerance that it does not come from the educational wise but it comes from home whereas family and older generation explain their own culture.

Most of my point of view of different culture or belief did come from teaching in school when I took a World Religion course in grade 10. I learn a lot more about other beliefs and cultures more than usual. It was interesting because most culture have their own traditions that are practically the same traditions than other cultures. I also learn the ideas from my family and realtives. I do believe that the students should learn and understand the cultural teachings in school, so that they have a strong influence that could possibly change their perceptions. They key to moral education is to fuse the sentiments (especially love) to teaching of the good. We begin to do good because we love our preceptors (especially our parents); we want to please them and we want to be like them. We continue to do good because that is the kind of person we have grown up to be. ” 9 (McConnel1996, 79) McConnell is trying to say in this quote is that tolerance start at home and than become more involving with the community. He also said that one could be part of the local community even though cosmopolitanism states that.

But, it cannot be forgotten that the main purpose is to look at the world as a one society, world peace. Things will have to be accepted in some days where as it is possible that the communities maybe forgotten. To the conclusion, the 2 articles “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism” by Martha Nussbaum and “Don’t Forget the Little Plattons” by Michael McConnel, had made excellent point of view of their own opinion about tolerance and cultures. I agree more of Nussbaum side because he stated that the world would be a better place if we all became more tolerant of other beliefs.

This will help the world to have peace and as one culture. A way to change this is to change the teaching in school, whereas students can learn more about other cultures. However, the students’ opinions will change with the influence when the parent or relative tell the stories about their own culture. Another argument is the Stoics when the world was to get ride of smaller political groups that the war of dangers would be reduced. Both sides of these two arguments had made perfect sense points about the author’s opinion about tolerance and world peace.

It is hard to select which to select as the best points, but in my opinion I liked Nassbaum points because she explained the benefits. On the other hand, McConnell explained the potentials. Nassbaum leaves me with better agreement on his article. Notes 1. Martha Nussbaum et al. , “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism,” in For Love of Country: Debating the limits of patriotism, ed. Joshua Cohen (Boston: Beacon Press, 1996), 10. 2. Nussbaum, 7. 3. Nussbaum, 6. 4. Nussbaum, 8. 5. Nussbaum, 8. 6. Nussbaum, 8. 7. Nussbaum, 8. 8. Nussbaum, 9. 9.

Micheal McConnell et al. , “Don’t Forget the Little Platoons,” in For Love of Country: Debating the limits of patriotism, ed. Joshua Cohen (Boston: Beacon Press, 1996), 79. Works Cited McConnell, Michael. et al. “Don’t Forget the Little Platoons. ” In For Love of Country: Debating the limits of patriotism, edited by Joshua Cohen, 78-84. Boston: Beacon Press, 1996. Nussbaum, Martha, et al. “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism. ” In For Love of Country: Debating the limits of patriotism, edited by Joshua Cohen, 2-17. Boston: Beacon Press, 1996.

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer