Idea
The text affirms that tolerance requires both individual will and political will at the level of the state. Tolerance does not survive on intention alone, nor is it enough for individuals to want it if the overall structure remains hostile to it. Nor is the state enough unless this finds moral and social acceptance. The meaning here is that tolerance is a shared act between conscience and institution.
Concise Formulation
Tolerance: requires individual will and political will
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This claim comes as a continuation of the idea that tolerance is not achieved through discourse alone. It is part of the book’s argument in shifting the discussion from the level of abstract principle to the level of real conditions. The state is not a secondary detail, but a party in shaping the space in which difference can be lived without repression.
Why It Matters
Its importance lies in preventing the reader from reducing tolerance to a merely well-intentioned personal stance. This helps in understanding Arkoun as a thinker who links ethics and politics. It also shows that any discussion of plurality requires institutional guarantees; otherwise, it remains only a wish.
Brief Evidence
The text affirms that tolerance requires both individual will and political will at the level of the state. Tolerance does not survive on intention alone, nor is it enough for individuals to want it if the overall structure remains hostile to it. Nor is the state enough unless this finds moral and social acceptance.
Reading Questions
- Why does the text emphasize individual and political will together?
- What does mentioning the state add to the meaning of tolerance?
Degree of Documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear location in the book’s material.