The Problem of the Perception of the “Tolerance” Concept in the Russian Cultural Space

Abstract

The article is devoted to the problem of perception of the concept of ‘tolerance’ in modern Russia. The authors point out that in recent years there has been a tradition of persistently ignoring the concept itself and non-acceptance of the basic concepts of tolerance. The authors discuss the relevance of the concept of ‘tolerance’ and the need to revise the established practices of its use. The article discusses 4 main aspects of criticism of the practices of using the concept. The first aspect is connected with the possibility (in conditions of a tolerant attitude to an alien value system) of replacing one’s values with others in culture. This can be destructive for the entire system of culture and society. The second aspect is related to the possible incompatibility of different value systems. The authors propose, within the framework of public discussion, to determine the boundaries and limits in the field of value systems, as well as the possibilities of acceptance and rejection of specific cultural phenomena. The third aspect of criticism is directed at the existing concepts of tolerance, in which it is understood as a purely external tolerant attitude to various manifestations of alien cultural attitudes. The authors emphasize that this approach to tolerance formed the basis of the policy of ‘multiculturalism’, and may have caused its crisis. The authors propose to develop a model of tolerance based on the concept of dialogue developed in Russian cultural thought. The dialogue is not limited only to external communications, but requires the desire to understand the partner in the communication process. The fourth aspect of the criticism of modern concepts of tolerance is aimed at the fact that in the modern communication space attention is paid only to some forms of tolerance (racial, medical, gender, sexual). They are connected, first of all, with individual manifestations of personality. But such forms as religious, intercultural, and political are practically ignored, based on features that represent attitudes learned within the framework of an individual’s social and cultural existence, characterizing them as a representative of a certain community (social, cultural, ethnic, religious).