Thomas Martin

Thomas Martin is the O.K. Bouwsma Chair in Philosophy at the University of Nebraska at Kearney. Along with his fellow colleagues who are dedicated to the study of the Great Books, he teaches the works of Plato, Aristotle, G.K. Chesterton, Dostoyevsky, and Solzhenitsyn, to mention a few.

Several years ago at the University of Nebraska at Kearney, the following objective for Cultural Diversity was recommended:

To teach understanding, tolerance, and appreciation of cultural diversity.

If we hope to achieve a more peaceful and harmonious world, we must develop a tolerance for those whose values and lifestyles differ from our own.

I doubt if anyone is against the idea of a "more peaceful and harmonious world," especially if it can be achieved through college courses. However, we ought to ask how the professor will measure this and if the student might not just be mouthing the right answer for a grade.

Obviously, an instrument needs to be devised to measure the tolerance levels of a student.

How about a story!

Once upon a time there was a group of people who were going to stone a woman for committing adultery. They refused to tolerate her actions because she had broken the law, not to mention upsetting at least one family in their town. In addition, maybe she even upset some of the members of crowd who thought she might talk and expose them, who also knew her in a matter of speaking. Who knows, the story does not go into detail. All we know is that they were ready to execute the law: "Anyone who is caught in the act of adultery is to be stoned." Ready to pick up stones and throw them, they were stopped by a question: "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

This question was not addressed to the mob, but to each of its members. The question did not ask them to tolerate the woman, or appreciate her "lifestyle," and it did not ask them to stop throwing stones. It simply asked if they were innocent. They answered with their feet, "being convicted by their own consciences."

This story draws a line in the sand between intolerance, love and forgiveness. When people reach the point where they can no longer tolerate each other, they need a strong police force, like the one in South Africa to keep the Zulu from hacking each other to death. Love, on the other hand, will forgive the person, but it will not tolerate his actions.

Imagine a nation where parents tolerate their children's actions, friends tolerate their friends' actions, and neighbors tolerate their neighbors' actions, no matter how vicious or cruel? Furthermore, imagine a man who is tolerant of his own actions and, therefore, never ashamed of himself.

The doctrine of tolerance is a sure road to mediocrity for man, as he wallows in his shortcomings, gluttony, lollygagging, lewdness, and envy, to mention a few.

In order to be moral, a human being needs to be discerning and intolerant.

Socrates thought he would fail to be human if he placed the idols of wealth, reputation, and honors before virtue. At the end of Socrates' apology, his speech given before the senate of Athens after they condemned him to death, he entrusted his sons to his accusers:

When my sons grow up, gentlemen, if you think that they are putting money or anything else before goodness, take your revenge by plaguing them as I plagued you; and if they fancy themselves for no reason, you must scold them just as I scolded you, for neglecting the important things and thinking that they are good for something when they are good for nothing.

This just man died because he was intolerant of his fellow countrymen, who could only tolerate tolerance. And, he did it out of love. *

"Of all conceivable things the most dangerous thing is to be alive." -G. K. Chesterton