Introduction

Recently, the problem of tolerance has become widely covered in the media, at the state and international level. This is due to participating cases of intolerance towards distempering people from hostile opponents. At the same time, there are often cases of frank conflicts that pour into brutal and bloody collisions. According to most analysts, such a tendency is associated with a decrease in the level of tolerance towards people, rigidity in relations, inability to tactfully and competently express their position, not the assimary significant aspects of other people's lives. That is why we would like to consider the problem of the formation of tolerance in modern society. It seems to us that the greatest emphasis should be done at adolescence, since it is during this period a person acquires ways and ways of competent adaptation in an adult world. Thinking a teenager still absorbs everything with children's immediacy, but already capable of competent analysis of situations and the relevant conclusions from it. Now the worldview picture of a teenager is being formed and all that he will absorb them, will be in the future to determine his life position and ways of behavior in society. We see the relevance of our work as necessary to identify the most effective ways of formation in adolescents of tolerant behavior.

The purpose of the work is to create an effective training on the formation of tolerance adapted for adolescents, taking into account their psychophysiological features.

The object of the study is children of adolescence (13-15 years old).

Accordingly, we consider the subject to the definition of methods for the formation of tolerance in adolescence

Hypothesis: 1. The formation of tolerance in adolescents most effectively occurs through the game;

2. The formation of tolerance in adolescents is most effectively happening through discussions.

In the course of our work, we are going to solve the following tasks:

1. Reveal approaches to understanding tolerance and ways to form;

2. Create an effective training for the formation of tolerant behavior for adolescence;

3. Finding methods for diagnosing tolerance.

To solve these tasks, we use the following research methods: Analysis of literature, observation, testing, survey, training exercises.

The structure of our work is as follows: Introduction, two chapters (theoretical and practical), conclusion, a list of used literature and applications.

The problem of tolerance and paths of its formation.

The problem of tolerance is quite young both in Russia and in foreign studies. The first works on this topic appear only in the mid-90s. Their authors were Ollport, Borba Michele, Kamungeremu David, Vogt W. Paul, Wandberg Robert, as well as some universities. An important factor in the global recognition of the need to study this problem was the Declaration of Tolerance Principles, approved by General Conference of the UNESCO General Conference on November 16, 1995, it proclaims on November 16, annually celebrated International Day dedicated to tolerance. This declaration also gives an international definition to the concept of tolerance and opposite to it - intershotomy.

It follows from it that "tolerance means respect, the adoption and proper understanding of the rich diversity of the cultures of our world, our forms of self-expression and methods of manifestation of human individuality. Tolerance makes it possible to achieve the world and contributes to the replacement of the culture of the world of the world. The manifestation of tolerance does not mean a tolerant attitude towards social injustice, refusal from their beliefs or concessions to others. Tolerance means everyone is free to adhere to their beliefs and recognizes the same right for others; means recognizing that people by their nature differ in appearance, position, speech, behavior and values, have the right to live in the world and maintain their individuality and cannot impose the views of one person to others.

Intenitacy is the rejection of another person, unwillingness to coexistence with other (other) people; Intelation is manifested through destructive, conflict, aggressive behavior. Declaration of the principles of tolerance // Age of tolerance: scientific and publicistic messenger. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2001 "

In Russia, the problem of tolerance is also very young, but its appearance in our opinion is associated with its huge role in the formation of a productive, holistic society. The first works in this area appeared at the beginning of this century. They were conducted by the Moscow State University. In particular, a scientific and publicistic Bulletin was created: the "age of tolerance". In the future, other scientists of our country began to develop this problem. So Shchekoldina S. D. published a book called "Training tolerance", which summarized the existing material on this issue, and also presented the training aimed at the formation of tolerant behavior for a wide age spectrum. Many psychological services across the country offer their tolerance training as one of the possible formative trainings.

The significance of the formation of tolerance is confirmed at the state level. Recently was created Federal program Government of the Russian Federation: "Formation of plants of tolerant consciousness and prevention of extremism in russian society».

The concept of tolerance is meaningful and varied. In each culture, there is its definition of tolerance, which are largely similar, however, they have some distinctive features. Here are some of the "definitions of tolerance in leading languages \u200b\u200bof the world:

Tolerance (English) - willingness to be tolerant, condescending;

To Tolerance (eng.) - Being tolerant, allow the existence of various opinions without their discrimination;

Tolerance (FR.) - The conviction is that others can think and act in a manner other than our own;

Tolerencia (APP.) - The ability to take ideas or opinions other than their own;

Kuan Rong (Kit.) - Take others as they are, and be generous in relation to others;

Tasamul "(Arab.) - Concision, mercy, all-saying, the ability to take others as they are, and forgive;

Tolerance, tolerance (rus) - the ability to endure (withstand, endure, to put up with something), take / recognize the existence of anyone, reconcile, lead in accordance with yourself with respect to someone / aware condescending to something / someone. Schekoldina S.D. Training Tolerance. - M.: "Axle-89", 2004, from 14-15. "

As we see, each of the definitions has its own cultural specificity. So English - indulgence, Chinese - generosity, Russian - the ability to endure.

IN scientific literature Tolerance is considered primarily as respect and recognition of equality, refusal of dominance and violence, recognition of human culture, norms, beliefs and refusal of this diversity to unity or to the predominance of a single point of view. Tolerance involves the willingness to take others as they are, and interact with them on the basis of consent. Tolerance should not be reduced to indifference, conformism, infringement of own interests. First of all, it involves the reciprocity and active position of all stakeholders. Tolerance is an important component life position A mature personality having its values \u200b\u200band interests, ready, if necessary, to defend them, but at the same time, with respect for the positions and values \u200b\u200bof other people.

In accordance with the foregoing, there is a need to specify the qualities of the tolerant personality. This will give an opportunity for better diagnosis and preparation of tolerance training. One of the first generic characteristics of the tolerant personality gave Oollport. He allocated the following parameters:

- "Orientation on yourself (a tolerant person is more focused on personal independence, less - to belong to external institutions and authorities);

The need for certainty (recognizes diverse, is ready to listen to any point of view and feels less discomfort in a state of uncertainty);

A smaller commitment to order (a tolerant person is less oriented on social order, less pedantic);

The ability to empathy (a tendency to give more adequate judgments about people);

Preference for freedom, democracy (for him does not matter hierarchy in society);

Knowledge of himself (a tolerant person is well aware of his virtues and disadvantages and not inclined in all the troubles to blame others);

Responsibility (a sense of responsibility is developed, it does not shift responsibility on others);

Security (sense of own security and conviction that you can cope with the threat) Schekoldin S.D. Training tolerance. - M.: "Axle-89", 2004, from 17-18. ".

Schekoldina also highlights criteria and indicators of human tolerance. It relates to them: social activity (willingness to interact in various social inter-ethnic situations in order to achieve the goals set and building constructive relations in society), the mobility of behavior (the ability to quickly change the strategy or tactics, taking into account the developing circumstances), the divergence of behavior (the ability of non-standard Solve ordinary problems, tasks, orientation to search for several solution options), empathy (adequate idea of \u200b\u200bwhat happens in the inner world of the person) and the sustainability of the individual (the formation of social and moral motives of personality behavior in the process of interaction with people of other ethnic and social communities) .

Several levels of tolerance stands out:

1. Civilizational - the absence of violence in contacts of various cultures and civilizations;

2. International - conditions of cooperation and peaceful coexistence of states, regardless of their magnitude, economic development, ethnic and religious affiliation of their population;

3. Ethnic - tolerance to someone else's lifestyle, other people's customs, traditions, businesses, opinions and ideas.

4. Social - partnership interaction between various social groups of the Company, its authority, when they recognize the need for such cooperation and respect for the positions of the parties;

5. Individual - respect for another personality, understanding that there are views other than their own.

Tolerance performs the following functions: 1) prevents intergroup and intragroup conflicts, which contributes to the formation and maintenance of the stability of the group; 2) creates an image of a stable and cohesive group, which provides more productive interaction with state structures, with social groups and organizations.

One of the factors of the formation of tolerance is the acquisition by a person socially significant norms and rules of behavior. They are created during the historical development of a person and contribute to its harmonious and uniform progress. Worldwide, there is a certain system of values \u200b\u200benshrined in most countries at the legislative level. It includes such norms as a presumption of human rights, tolerance for disadvantages and mistakes of other people, the value of the consent and non-violent resolution of conflicts, following the rules of law, compassion, empathy, sympathy, value human life and the absence of physical suffering.

Another factor in the formation of a tolerant personality is considered to be a person's desire for self-consciousness, expanding its horizons, the formation of a worldview position. These qualities strengthen a person's ideas about themselves. Make them more positive and adequate. This can also include the formation of a higher level of self-esteem in humans. As Shekoldina notes: "In the development of an understanding of the personality of the surrounding reality, a person becomes an inner world. This is of interest in myself and your own life, the qualities of your personality, the need to compare ourselves with others. Personal tolerance contributes to the formation of a real idea of \u200b\u200bthemselves and surrounding Chekoldin S. D. Tolerance training. - M.: "Ace-89", 2004, from 57. ".

A person with a high level of tolerance has a characteristic complex of behavior characterized by reduced aggressiveness. It is less conflict. The trend towards productive management and resolution of conflicts prevails. At the same time, a person acquires a positive attitude to life, which increases its stress resistance and the overall vital tone.

A sign of a tolerant personality can also be considered the ability to leave conflict situations by negotiation. It is believed that possession of a large spectrum of conflict resolution methods leads to the most productive., Tolerant interaction.

The exacerbation has recently interests to the problem of tolerance - a noticeable side of both ordinary and theoretical consciousness. This interest has important political and cultural grounds. In the mass consciousness, the judgment dominates that it is not enough tolerance in the world. At the same time, there is a growing understanding that tolerance cannot be considered as a panacea from all the faces of the modern world. It can be seen with the unarmed look that intolerance to differences (racial, ethnic, religious, age-related, gender, etc.) can lead people to disastrous consequences. However, it is impossible not to see that connivance and condescension may not be at a lesser extent shaking the human world. So the problem of tolerance is not as simple as it may seem at first glance.

Pluralism of values \u200b\u200band blurring of norms in modern culture determined the need to develop the concept of tolerance itself. The problem of tolerance is now subject to the attention of many sciences and in each of them this term is filled with its own specific content. Thus, in terms of ethics, tolerance is a norm of a civilized compromise between competing cultures and readiness for the adoption of other views. In political science, tolerance is the willingness of the authorities to allow dissent in society. With philosophical position, tolerance acts as an ideological category, reflecting the universal rule of active attitude to another. In the "new philosophical encyclopedia" (2001, t. IV, p. 75) is given the following definition: "Tolerance - the quality characterizing attitudes towards another person as an equal to-worthy person and expressing in the conscious suppression of the feeling of a foreign one's senses."

Word? Tolerance? Its roots dates back to the Latin language. Latin term "Tolerantia" meant "endurance", "passive patience", "voluntary transfer of suffering." In the 16th century Other values \u200b\u200bare added: "permissions", "restraint", "assignment in the matter of religious freedom." In a traditional understanding, the word tolerance is perceived as tolerance for someone else's behavior, someone else's opinion, foreign beliefs. Such a interpretation seems too amorphous and needs to be specified.

Tolerance is the value necessary and fundamental to realize human rights and the achievement of the world. In its main form, tolerance is recognized for other rights to respect their personality and self-identity. For the first time, new European political and social values, established in a new time in the process of developing free entrepreneurship, democratization of policies and power, and served as the basis for today's international human rights standards, were defined in the appeal to tolerance as a fundamental value for establishing a new public order. Western political thinkers clearly expressed the idea of \u200b\u200bthe need for tolerance for society, which could no longer be tolerant for intolerance and hostility caused by the religious wars of the XVI-XVII centuries. It was the recognition of tolerance as the necessary conditions of the world between nations, it helped to form the historical atmosphere, due to which the first European declarations of rights appeared, which became the forerunner of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted on December 10, 1948

Tolerance can not act as an eternal abstract value or some categorical imperative, which must be followed automatically, out of connection with the specific historical situation. Tolerance has a story and it shows that at a certain stage of the existence of human society no tolerance existed. Then in the context of certain historical realities there was a requirement of tolerance. But, arising once, it no longer left the ethics of the Western world, but the content of this concept changed from the century to the century. Tolerance is the idea of \u200b\u200bnot recently. On the contrary, the history of this term is studying that the tolerance was the principle of interreligious dialogue in the Middle Ages. The need to prove its right not by force, but the word required attention to someone else's opinion and once won various interpretations. Historically the first and dominant form of manifestation of tolerance is violence. The understanding of the problem of tolerance as freedom of conscience is characteristic of humanists (E. Rotterdam, T. Ma) and Reformation figures (M. Luther). The split of Western Christianity on Catholicism and Protestantism led to the need to discuss the problem of coexistence of various churches, various religious beliefs. This problem is particularly acute J. Locke in his "message about violence" (1689), which is called the classics of the ideology of liberalism called the tolerance manifesto. It reveals not only its principles, but also indicate the conditions in which it is possible: civil society, a state recognizing the highest goal of its development of the benefit of a separate citizen, the church formed as a free community of free citizens. Locke It was important to defend the rights of new Protestant movements, the emergence and existence of which was directly related to the occurrence of bourgeois culture and the ideology of individualism. The main argument of the Locke in protection of violence is reduced to the approval of the fundamental irrationality of coercion to faith. Such coercion simply does not reach its goal, since it is not able to convince a person sincerely take the conviction imposed on him. Refusal of violence as a person's attachment to faith and focus on the sincerity of beliefs, subject to voluntary entry into the community of believers - here are two main arguments in favor of tolerance in 17 V. In the works of Locke, tolerance gains a feature of the theory, which is why with his name the origins of the conceptual justification of this concept and the first stage in developing tolerance issues are associated.

In the Epoch of Enlightenment at 18 V. Theoretical understanding and practical embodiment of the principle of tolerance occurs. Thanks to the enlighteners, the concept? Tolerance? firmly entered into a political dictionary.

At 19 in. The problem of tolerance was developed in liberal philosophy, where it was understood as an expression of internal and external freedom, as the ability to the well-thought out choice between alternative points of view and ways of behavior. J. Art. Mill (1806-1873) "On Freedom" (1859) is considered as a second stage in the development of tolerance issues. In it, tolerance is directly associated with the principle of justice and freedom. The Company offers a person certain rules of the hostel and imposes a type of behavior that deprives the nature of individuality. Therefore, according to Mill, in terms of its personally, the individual must be quite autocraved. A person cannot refuse stereotypes, because the standards of behavior form the field of freedom for an individual in the sense that the behavior of others is predicted, and everyone knows what to expect from another, but it should be preserved the possibility of developing individuality. The individual is understood as Mill as the "absolute sovereign" above his own life, and therefore the tolerance for his opinion and behavior naturally follows from the principles of individual autonomy and freedom. Individual freedom Mill determines as a citizen's right to autonomy in everything that does not cause harm to society. Freedom can only be limited by the principle of not harm to other members of society. Mill believed that people in tolerant ratio should be equal, i.e. The subject and object of tolerance should not suffer from a tolerant behavior strategy.

Already at this stage of the development of the theory of tolerance, two main directions can be distinguished in determining the content of this concept. First, tolerance is considered as the principle of dialogue, relations between certain social groups or public associations. Secondly, tolerance is interpreted as the right of a separate person not to change its values, to its nature, if it does not violate the freedom of others and the rules of behavior in society, i.e. Tolerance seems to be the condition for the development of individuality.
Such an interpretation of tolerance was substantial criticized in the XX century, when the question arose not only about the coexistence of peoples and religious denominations in Europe, but also the problem of coexistence of various ethnic communities within the framework of individual states, the legal system of which is focused on democratic principles. Migration processes developed after the Second World War led to the collision of cultural stereotypes, which were completely interacting quite peacefully. The question arose about the value of tolerance, since it leads to a violation of traditional cultural priorities. As a result, new approaches to understanding tolerance in the framework of pluralistic society are beginning to be developed, which has found its bright reflection in the composition of John Rowls "Justice theory" (1971), which is recognized as the third stage in the development of the liberal theory of tolerance. The principle of tolerance at Rawls is dictated by his concept? Justice as honesty?, Based on the fundamental equality of all members of society. In order to find the principles of justice, a person should put himself in the situation at which he must negotiate with others about what is fair. In such a situation, people would be guided by the principle of maximizing the minimum, i.e. We would choose such a social device that would ensure the maximum welfare of the minimally secured members. Tolerance here is one of the basic conditions of justice. The fact is that in any political discussions, a person cannot be guided by his private considerations about what is a blessing for all mankind, because it would contradict the initial position in which the principles of justice are selected. For political discussions, on Rawls, the principle is faithful? The principle of the right above the blessing?, Essentially, and is the specificization of the principle of tolerance.

Another representative of the liberal tradition of tolerance Peter Nich-Kolson in its fundamental article "Tolerance as a moral ideal" (1985) determines the tolerance as an attitude, which is based on six characteristics:

1. Deviation. What is tolerant to be tolerant, deviates from what the subject of tolerance thinks as proper, or from what he does as proper.
2. Importance. The subject of deviation is not trivial.
3. Disagreement. The tolerant constant disagree morally with the deviation.
4. Power. The subject of tolerance has the strength necessary for an attempt to suppress or prevent or prevent tolerance subject.
5. Non-rejection. Nevertheless, the subject of tolerance does not use its strength, thereby allowing the deviation.
6. Goodness. Tolerance is true, and a tolerant subject of goods. This characteristic is a discussion.

As a result, "tolerance is the virtue of the abstinence from the use of force for interference in the opinion or action of another, at least they deviated in something important from the opinion or action of the subject of tolerance and although the latter disagrees disagree with them." In addition, tolerance is a blessing. However, indicating the theoretical possibility of understanding tolerance as an independent good, Nicholson actually speaks very little about how it is possible. After all, if there is a good tolerance, he does not need any substantiation of this goodness. Meanwhile, the goodness of tolerance is the most debated characteristic. If the value of tolerance for its approval in society needs a philosophical justification, how can we talk about her inner good? Therefore, theorists prefer to talk about the respect of the personality in moral disagreement with opinions or actions of this person. This formula resembles the Christian commandment of hate to sin, but love to the sinner. However, the story shows the danger of such an understanding, because it is not clear why respect for the person must prevent the struggle against the opinions or actions of this person; Similarly, the love of the sinner did not interfere with the Inquisition to eradicate heresy and even encouraged her to this. Understanding this danger makes introduce the principle of respect for human rights, the concept of which resurrect the principle of the autonomy of Individual Mill and again leads us to the interpretation of tolerance as a good.

In followers of the liberal concept of tolerance with its pronounced individualistic orientation, many critics arose, which argued that tolerance cannot act as universal value. Each person is a representative of a certain ethnos, a certain social layer, a certain region, etc., so it is impossible to force it to adopt the principle of tolerance, if it is not obvious as certainly valuable. The need to study the social practices approval of justice and tolerant communication, formed in various cultures, in order to find ways to establish the principles of interethnic and interfaith communication.

The current critical attitude towards the value of tolerance takes its beginning from the Herbert Brochure Marcuse "Critica of Clean Tolerance" (1969). In it, the author claims that in the modern world, tolerance, having lost contact with the truth, ceased to be a "revolutionary virtue", and turned into a "pure tolerance", which contributes to the preservation of the status quo, rather than changing the existing order. And this serves as a sentence for "repressive tolerance" and encourages to look for a different, "discrimination-powered tolerance".

In recent years, in modern political philosophy, the value of tolerance is criticized both by politically left and from politically right philosophers. To date, there is no any developed completed theory, which would have appeared to this criticism. Meanwhile, a number of philosophers are currently working to resolve this problem. In modern literature on tolerance, therefore, they are increasingly talking about multiculturalism as a principle that suggests the possibility of autonomous development of different communities within a single society, preserving the diversity of values \u200b\u200bexisting in society and ideals, ways to organize living space. The principle of multi-culturalism puts the problem of pluralism of the foundations of tolerance and excludes the possibility of finding a unified formula of tolerance with which everything would agree. An attempt to create such a pluralistic theory of tolerance took Michael Walzer in his book "On tolerance" (1997). The author writes that the tolerance "provides life itself, for the persecution is often conducted to death; In addition, it provides social life, the lives of those diverse communities in which we all live. " Based on this, Wal-Chub formulates excellent aphorism: "Tolerance makes it possible to exist differences; Differences determine the need for tolerance. " The tolerance of Walzer considers as a whole range of relationships: 1) submissive adoption for the sake of peace; 2) passive, relaxed indifference; 3) the fundamental recognition that the other has rights, even if he enjoys them by an unattractive way; 4) openness to others, curiosity; 5) the approval of the difference. Tolerance is possible only in the conditions of peaceful coexistence of groups of people with different history, culture and identity. Working out the problem of coexistence, the author calls and explores five? Tolerant regimes?: Multinational Empire, Consociative Modes, International Community, National States and Immigrant Communities. In view of this diversity, Walzer expresses the idea that practical questions Tolerance, such as problems of religion, education and gender, should be solved in different ways in various political and cultural contexts.

In modern philosophy, tolerance is understood as a very problematic, contradictory and even paradoxical concept. The logical paradoxicality of tolerance is increasing the approval of the advantage of abstinence from the prevention of moral evil. British researcher Susan Mendus in his own, which became for the modern theory of the tolerance of the classical, monograph "Tolerance and the boundaries of liberalism" (1989) illustrates this paradox with the words of Bossyuet: "I have the right to chase you, because I'm right, and you are not." Another British philosopher Morally B. Williams declares that, since tolerance is required only to what it is impossible to be tolerant, is it some? Could not be virtue?. The logical paradoxicalness of tolerance generates the difficulties of the practical application of this concept to public life phenomena (for example, drug addiction and pedophilia). These difficulties lead many modern philosophers to the concept of tolerance as instrumental value, i.e. What contributes to the achievement of another, more weighty in its value value. By virtue of this, tolerance is considered not as a goal, but as a means of minimal requirement for social relations. Only in the conditions of a tolerant society can be carried out a complete disclosure of the actual possibilities of man and society.

The history of tolerance as a theoretical problem and modern discussions in this area indicate that tolerance is currently cannot be considered exclusively as a fashionable slogan or as a tribute to political fashion. Now the following questions are especially acute: how can you form a tolerant attitude? How can I solve the problem of interethnic conflicts? What should be tolerance strategy today? What are the limits of tolerance? In the modern theory of the tolerance of unambiguous answers to the questions set. Yes, and the theory of tolerance itself, which would respond to the peculiarities of the modern multicultural pluralistic society and globalization processes and ensure the necessary political and moral consensus in such a society, still not developed. Discussions about tolerance as values \u200b\u200bcontinue. Tolerance remains one of the most controversial values \u200b\u200bof modern society. However, this inconsistency does not reduce its meaning, but rather reflects the extreme complexity of that world in which modern person is doomed. You can agree with the German researcher A. Fromman, who claims that tolerance is very hard.

LITERATURE

1. Bondireva S.K., Wheels D.V. Tolerance (Introduction to the problem). - M., 2003.
2. Age of tolerance. - 2001. - Vol. 1-2.
3. Lecturer V.A. On tolerance, pluralism and criticism // Questions of philosophy. - 1997. - № 11.
4. Linguculturological problems of tolerance: Tez. Dokl. Inter-Danube. conf. Ekaterinburg, 24-26 Oct., 2001 - Ekaterinburg, 2001.
5. The logic of tolerance and the right: materials of scientific. conf. Ekaterinburg, December 24-25, 2001 - Ekaterinburg, 2002.
6. On the way to tolerant consciousness. - M., 2000.
7. Peppets A.V. Tolerance Life Strategy: The problem of becoming in Russia and in the West. - Ekaterinburg, 2002.
8. "Message of Versionship" John Locke: Point of view / Society. ed. MB Homyakov. - Yekaterinburg, 2002.
9. Rierdon B.E. Tolerance - the road to the world. - M., 2001.
10. Skvortsov L.V. Tolerance: illusion or rescue agent // October. - 1997. - № 3.
11. Tolerance // Modern Philosophical Dictionary. - M., 2004. - P. 726-730.
12. Tolerance. Research, translations, book information. Herald of the Ural Interregional Institute of Public Sciences. - 2001. - № 1.
13. Tolerance in the context of the multipleness of Russian culture: theses of the international. Scientific conf. May 29-30, 2001 - Ekaterinburg, 2001.
14. Tolerance in society Differences: Collective monograph / Ed. V.E. Kemerova, T.Sh. Kerimova, A.Yu. Zenkova. - Vol. 15. - Ekaterinburg, 2005.
15. Tolerance in modern civilization: Materials of the International. conf. Ekaterinburg, 14-19 May 2001 / Ed. MB Homyakov. - Ekaterinburg, 2001.
16. Tolerance and non-violence: theory and international experience: materials of the winter school of young teachers of the Ural-Siberian region (Ekaterinburg, Jan.-Fevr. 2000). - Ekaterinburg, 2000. - Ch. 1-2.
17. Tolerance and education: the current problems of the formation of tolerant consciousness: collective monograph / d. ed. A.V. Peppers. - Ekaterinburg, 2006.
18. Tolerance and polisheet sociality. - Ekaterinburg, 2001.
19. Tolerance and consent. - M., 1997.
20. Tolerance: Materials of the school of young scientists "Russia - West: philosophical foundations of socio-cultural tolerance." - Ekaterinburg, 2001.
21. Walzer M. About Tolerance / Per. with ang. I. Murning. - M., 2000.
22. Philosophical and linguocultureological problems of tolerance: collective monograph / d. ed. ON THE. Cupina and M.B. Hamsters. - M., 2005.
23. Khomyakov M.B. The problem of tolerance in Christian philosophy. - Ekaterinburg, 2000.

Government of St. Petersburg

Committee on Science and Higher School

Competition of student research work on the problem of the formation of a tolerant environment in St. Petersburg

"Tolerance, as a problem of Russian society"

Registration number

Brief abstract:

This work is devoted to the study of the problem of tolerance in Russian society, based on the analysis of literature, the data obtained during the survey of students of our Academy, as well as personal observation. The work attempts to investigate the content of the concept of tolerance, as well as reveal the possible causes of intolerance.

Introduction

Main part

1.1. Analysis of the content of the concept of tolerance and the history of its use in Russia.

1.2 The problem of understanding tolerance in modern Russian society

1.3 Possible causes of intolerance in student environment

3. List of used literature.

4. Annex

Introduction

Russia has formed during its development as a multinational and multi-confessional state. Throughout history, representatives of different peoples, races (European views and Mongoloids), various beliefs, peacefully coexisted on its endless expanses. Such a way of life was staggered by centuries. The foundation on which the Russian state was lined up and strengthened the idea of \u200b\u200bdialogue between the cultures of the East and West, Europe and Asia. The "border" geographical and cultural situation of our country forced Russian people to show flexibility and tolerance during contacts with their numerous neighbors, which significantly differed from each other with their religious views and weight lifestyles.

The Russian Empire also included peoples related to different cultures and confessing a wide variety of beliefs, but they all occupied their place in the multicultural and polisheligious structure of our Fatherland, contributing to its common creation. Representatives of all world religions currently lived in Russia and currently reside: Orthodox, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists. Orthodoxy, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism were traditional for Russia. Most of the country's population still professes Orthodoxy. At the same time, it is impossible to deny that the problems of racial and religious intolerance stood up and before the modern Russian culture.

The processes of globalization, which in the late 90s, Russia was actively involved, gave rise to new problems unknown earlier, from the impact on the consciousness and behavior of people of new information technologies to the problem of the influx of labor migrants from neighboring countries, gradually filling the major cities of Russia. In the rapidly changed atmosphere, the previous, developed centuries, the coexistence mechanisms of various nations were undermined, the ideological and ideological base providing cultural compromises went into the past along with the Soviet ideas of internationalism and the problem of the development of new mechanisms of cultural dialogue faced our society.

Our work, of course, does not claim to exhaust this complex and bulk theme, we just want to understand the origins of this problem, and maybe to offer practical options for solving it in a particular level.

Students from other countries are also studying in our Academy, these are Chinese, Moroccans, Nigerians, the inhabitants of the Congo, Indians, Syrians, Vietnamese, Uzbeks, Tajiks, Jews and many others. We meet every day with them in training audiences, we live side by side in one student hostel. And it is worth a confession, not always the relationship between us is smooth, so we were interested in the proposed topic and we decided to take part in the competition.

Objectives and objectives of our work:

Based on the analysis of literature, sociological surveys, personal observation to compile a general idea of \u200b\u200bthe level of tolerance with the existing Russian society in modern Russian society;

Reveal possible reasons intolerance towards representatives of other races, cultures and religions;

Suggest possible approaches to solving this problem in the medium of student youth.

To solve these tasks, we used the methods of etymological and historical analysis of concepts, an analytical review of literature. In addition, we sought to summarize the results of our personal observations and the opinions of our comrades on the relationship between representatives of different peoples and the faith in the youth environment. In the course of the study, we conducted conversations, surveys (including using ready-made methods for the study of tolerance). The results for which we came we presented in our work.

Kaluga State Pedagogical University. K.E. Tsiolkovsky

Institute of Social Relationship

Faculty of Social Work

Department of "Socio-Psychological and Humanitarian Disciplines"

Graduation qualified work

on the topic: Problems of tolerance in modern society

Kaluga - 2010.

Introduction

Chapter 1. Methodology for studying problems of tolerance

1.1 The essence of the concept of "tolerance" and its relevance in conditions modern Russia

1.2 Formation of pedagogy tolerance in foreign and domestic science

1.3 Investigation of problems of tolerance in psychology

Chapter 2. State-legal regulation of tolerance problems in modern society

2.1 Analysis of legal acts on tolerance issues

Chapter 3. Socio-pedagogical conditions for solving problems of tolerance in modern society

3.1 The main directions of work on the formation of tolerant relations

3.2 Working method for the formation of tolerant relations

Conclusion

List of used literature

Attachment 1

Appendix 2.

Appendix 3.

Appendix 4.

Introduction

The formation of civil society in Russia is possible only with the assimilation of fundamental democratic values. One of these values \u200b\u200bis tolerance - an indispensable condition for the survival and development of modern civilization. High rates of movement and migration of the population led to social interaction Representatives of different communities. The problem of tolerance is relevant for modern Russia due to its multinational composition and multi-confessionality, as well as in connection with the peculiarities of the experienced period of history - the collapse of the USSR, local wars, the strengthening of separatist sentiment, the growth of national extremism, etc. This is largely explained by those efforts that are currently being taken by various public and state institutions in Russia for the formation of high tolerance in society. In connection with the transformation of Russian society, its integration into the world community, a decrease in consent and tolerance in society, there is a need for the analysis of social and cultural prerequisites for tolerance, as well as the trends of its dynamics. Currently, the problem of the formation of tolerance is especially acute. Its relevance is explained by a number of reasons: a sharp bundle of world civilization in economic, social and other signs and related growth of intolerance, terrorism; development of religious extremism; The aggravation of interethnic relations caused by local wars, refugee problems, etc. To solve this problem, it is necessary to consider the essence and peculiarities of tolerance in the polyethnic Russian state, the study of which is at the junction of a number of humanitarian disciplines - sociology, history, psychology, pedagogy, political science. Tolerance as a new type of social relations represents a problem not only in the sphere of interaction of various cultures and civilization, but also within the latter, especially in Russia, which is under transformation. The unresolvedness of numerous social conflicts in Russian society, including due to the denial of their presence that occurred, both on the macro - and on the micro level, after the destruction of the powerful political and state press led to the release of a huge social energy of destruction, nihilism and intolerance. Important for the development of tolerance is the normal functioning of the mechanisms of integration of society. As integrators, as a rule, religion, state, culture, territory, etc. are considered as integrators. In particular, the growth of the authority of religious institutions is still poorly affecting the growth of tolerance in society. Sociological polls confirm the low ranking of the main state institutions. The culture that existed before the beginning of liberal reforms was not ready to answer new challenges of time (commercialization of relations, loss of previous ideals and values, globalization, etc. ).

Attempts by the westernization of Russian culture, along with other factors, influenced the aggravation of the conflict of generations. It is a special concern that 66% of the surveyed extremely low level of tolerance in relation to people of other nationalities. Of course, such a relationship is explained, first of all, the war in Chechnya, and especially, the seizure of the hostages in the theater center "Nord Ost". To the question: "If you are hostile to people of another nationality, then what exactly?" The following answers were obtained: to representatives of Caucasian nationalities (Chechens, Georgians and D.R.) - 66%; to the Jews - 17%; to representatives of Central Asian nationalities (Tajiks, Uzbeks, etc.) - 13%; Representatives of other nationalities - 4%.

All the above factors and served as a choice of the topic of research "Problems of Tolerance in Modern Society".

An object Studies - social tolerance, which includes various forms of tolerance of people in relationships with each other.

Thing Research is the problem of the formation of tolerance in modern Russian society.

purpose This work is to identify the main problems of the formation of tolerance in the Russian policultural regions to develop recommendations on the implementation of plants of tolerant consciousness in modern Russian society.

Achieving the goal required the following tasks :

1) to explore the current problems of tolerance;

2) to analyze state-legal acts regulating the problems of tolerance;

3) Develop comprehensive socio-pedagogical measures to develop tolerance in modern society.

Hypothesis Studies: The success of solving tolerance problems is related to the implementation of the following conditions:

1) studying problems of tolerance in psychology and pedagogy;

2) use of state-legal acts on tolerance;

3) the development of comprehensive measures to develop tolerance in modern society;

Ways and ways to solve the objectives of the study involve the definition of basic methods that were used during the study. In this paper, methods were used: a method of comparative analysis, a monographic method, a statistical method, analysis method, survey, polls.

Chapter 1. The methodology for studying the problems of tolerance.

1.1 The essence of the concept of "tolerance" and its relevance in the conditions of modern Russia

The sociocultural situation in our country, as well as in other multinational and multicultural societies, has always been characterized by the ambiguous attitude of the members of the social group to representatives of other national cultural groups.

People's life experience suggests that they create around themselves not only the material world, but also the world of human relationships, which includes a system of social behavior, which is governed by customs, traditions, norms characteristic of certain national and cultural communities. Representatives of the population of various countries, each separate social group, rural and city inhabitants - they all live in the world of their rules and norms, customs and traditions, which are expressed in a special language, manner of behavior, religion, system of ethnic views, social institutions. Based on the differences in the system of moral and ethical standards, customs and traditions, antithesis appeared in the primitive era: "We are", "their own - strangers", "I am different." A person as a subject and as a person does not exist without the other, the unit, the point of reference, which gives an idea of \u200b\u200bthe proportionality of a person in its comparison with itself. The philosophical category "Other" is considered as a central in the works of a number of philosophers.

The modern Argentine philosopher and the theologian Enrique Dussel, emphasizing the ethical character of the Latin American philosophy and believing that it is possible to comprehend the existence of a Latin American in its originality from the position of ethics, it believes that the category "Other" reflects the specific position of Latin America in relation to Europe. Fichte uses its own version of this category, concluding it in the antithesis: "I am" - "This is not me," or, as A. Lamartin noted: "... There is no one soul nearby - and the whole world is empty." MM Bakhtin has determined the need for the proportionality of "itself with another" concept of "significant other"; The essence of man, his self is manifested only in a dialogue, in cooperation with another person. But due to the individual perception of the surrounding world, every person in its own way understands the characteristics of the cultural environment of the representative of the outgroup, which is defined as a group in which this person not belong. Such a look at society, in which a certain group is considered to be central, and all other groups are measured and relate to it, called ethnocentrism.

The facts of the negative impact of ethnocentrism are confirmed by a number of sociological studies. For example, before the collapse of the USSR, the Institute of Sociological Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR interviewed 12 thousand people in a number of republics and regions. It revealed that there is a "significant prevalence of negative statements about people of other nationalities, their customs and traditions. They took place in Turkmenistan in 54 percent of respondents, in Kyrgyzstan - in 56, in Georgia - in 55, in Lithuania - 64 percent. "

Moscow Pedagogue V.B. Newbikov allocated a number of facts that determine the negative, intolerable attitude of the individual to the peculiarities of cultures of representatives of various Outgroups in Moscow. First, one of the most essential sociocultural characteristics of Moscow is its polyethicity; Today, Moscow is inhabited by representatives of over 120 ethnic groups, and the number of emigrants and internally displaced persons in the last five years increases markedly. Secondly, the multiconde confession of Moscow, which presents all world religions: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism. Thirdly, the polyculture of the medium, which includes not only polyethicity and confessionality, but also "... conjugate the samples of activities in various spheres of society."

The main concept of research is "tolerance". The value of this word when using it in everyday situations is easily captured from the context. However, when trying to give a scientific definition of tolerance, considerable difficulties arise, since this concept is used in various fields of knowledge: ethics, psychology, politics, theology, philosophy, medicine, etc. The word "tolerance" became consistent in Russian relatively recently; In the encyclopedic dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron (ed. 1901), there is only a small article about the existing "tolerance", as about tolerance to another kind of religious views.

In essence, the concepts "tolerance" and "tolerance" are synonymous. According to the sensible dictionary of the Russian language edited by D.N. Ushakova (T. 4. 1940), "Tolerance" - a derivative of French Tolerant - tolerant (similar examples of synonymicity of this concept are contained in other languages; for example: it. Duldsamkeit - tolerance and Toleranz - tolerance).

In the dictionary of V.I. Dalya (T. 4) The word "tolerance" is interpreted as a property or quality, the ability of what or anyone to tolerate "only by mercy, condescension." Similarly, interprets this concept and most of the modern dictionaries; So, the "modern dictionary of foreign languages" defines the concept of "tolerance" as "... tolerance, condescension to any, something", and "Big Encyclopedic Dictionary" under the general edition of A.M. Prokhorov treats "tolerance" as "... tolerance to other people's opinions, beliefs, behavior." The extended definition of tolerance, which reveals the need and the positive entity of this quality is contained in the brief philosophical encyclopedia: "Tolerance (from lat. Tolerantia - patience) - tolerance to another kind of views, nuts, habits. Tolerance is necessary in relation to the peculiarities of various peoples, nations and religions. She is a sign of confidence and consciousness of reliability of their own positions, a sign of open for all ideological flow, which is not afraid of comparisons with other points of view and does not avoid spiritual competition. " The definition of tolerance is more complete, in the ethics dictionary edited by A.A. Huseynova and I.S. Kona: "Tolerance - moral quality, which is characterized by attitudes towards interests, beliefs, beliefs, habits and behavior of other people. It is expressed in the desire to achieve mutual understanding and coordination of heterogeneous interests and points of view without the use of pressure, mainly explanation methods and beliefs ... ". This definition does not limit, in contrast to the previous, the use of tolerance only to representatives of other nations, nations and religions and notes the moral basis of this personality quality. But the definition of a dictionary for ethics is not final, as in it, like the previously mentioned definition, and the definition given by the American Word "AmericanHeritageDictionary", interpreting tolerance in wide sense As "the ability to vocation or practical recognition and respect for the beliefs and actions of other people," does not have a speech about the recognition and respect for the people themselves who differ from us - recognition as individuals and social or ethnic groups to which they belong. To determine the more adequate concept of tolerance, it is advisable to consider this quality in historical and philosophical aspects.

The idea of \u200b\u200btolerance arose in deep antiquity, as a solution to the problem of attitudes towards religious minorities; The principles of humane relationships with initiative and dissent, including such components as tolerance, loyalty, respect for the faith and the views of other people, peoples were gradually developed. A significant contribution to the development of legal registration and legislative introduction of the principle of freedom of conscience and violetness was made by the humanists of the Renaissance and Reformation, the Flaws of Enlightenment (J. Locke, "Letters about Valopeility"; Volta, "Treatise on Valopeility"). Gradually, the problem of tolerance ceased to be associated with the problem of only religious tolerance, - one of the components of the concept "sociocultural tolerance".

L.V. Skvortsov is dependent between the state-dominant in the state at a certain historical moment, the public consciousness and the established type of tolerance. Based on the signs of tolerance allocated by the author, it is possible to give names to the corresponding types of tolerance (see Appendix No. 1).

V.A. Lecturer considers four possible models of tolerance, which correspond to some really existing and existing philosophical concepts (see Appendix No. 2).

From the above listed models of tolerance, only the latter appears, according to the author, fruitful in a modern situation. Thus believes R.R. Valitova: "... Tolerance implies an interested attitude towards another, the desire to feel his worldview, which encourages the work of the mind because it is different, which is not similar to his own perception of reality." According to Otfrid Heffa, tolerance also implies mutual respect for various cultures and traditions, recognition of the intrinsicity of other cultures.

"Sociocultural tolerance" is the moral quality of the person, characterizing the tolerant attitude towards other people, regardless of their ethnic, national or cultural affiliation, tolerant attitude to another kind of views, theirs, habits; It is necessary in relation to the peculiarities of various cultural groups or to their representatives. She is a sign of confidence and consciousness of reliability of their own positions, a sign of open to all ideological flow, which is not afraid of comparisons with other points of view and does not avoid spiritual competition. It is expressed in the desire to achieve mutual respect, understanding and harmonizing the heterogeneous interests and points of view without the use of pressure, mainly by explanation and beliefs.

For a more complete clarification of the essence of the concept "tolerance", we consider it the opposite value - "intolerance" ("intolerance"). Based on the definition of tolerance, identifies the intolerance as a person's quality characterized by a negative, hostile attitude to the peculiarities of a culture of a social group, to other social groups in general or to separate representatives of these groups.

The study of the senses of hostility, the concept, in essence, opposite tolerance, is devoted to the work of O. Shemyakina. In particular, it is allocated as an emotional essential characteristics of anger, disgust and contempt.

One of the least socialized, and therefore historically earlier emotions included in the "Triad of hostility" is anger - emotion, for which a combination of high impulsiveness and low level of control and which is therefore fraught with a violent form of aggression.

The feeling of superiority, which often determines the lack of attention to the real properties of the object to which the emotion of contempt - disrespects is a narcotic product of human culture. This emotion is much more dangerous in its consequences than anger. Of the three emotions of "Triads of hostility" contempt - the coldest feeling. The danger of contempt is in the sustainable nature of this emotion, in contrast to anger or disgust. Anger suggests a fairly fast affective discharge, and the sense of disgust contributes to switching attention to anything else. The situation of contempt is sometimes a pleasure. Consequently, it itself and the associated commandment can easily be resumed.

Historically, the cultural recurrence of ancient emotion originating from the idea of \u200b\u200ba ritual "pure" and "unclean" is the emotions of disgust. For example, it is known that the warring representatives of the Christian and Muslim communities of Beirut mutually consider each other "dirty". Disgust encourages a person to remove from the object causing disgust, or eliminate the object itself. The reasons for the appearance of this emotion from the point of view of general psychology lies in contact with the thing that decomposed or spoiled in physical or psychological senses. Spanning in combination with physical uncleanness is the perfect object for disgust. Contact with a living human reality can destroy the initial installations on the objectivity of perception when one of the counterparties of communication is a person carrying the burden of the values \u200b\u200bof the culture to which belongs to ... ".

According to the Dictionary of Antonyms of the Russian Language M.V. Lviv, feeling opposite to contempt is "respect" - a feeling, according to the dictionary of the Russian language edited by A.P. Evgenaya (T.4), based on the recognition of some kind of advantages, merit, qualities.

To the second component of the "hostility triads" - disgust - the dictionary of antonyms of the explanation does not give, but in the dictionary of the Russian language edited by A.P. Evgenaya in the article "Antipathy" (vol.1) In a synonymous series of this concept, the concept of "disgust" is also given, and the feeling opposite to him - "sympathy". Thus, the next essential characteristic of tolerance is the concept of sympathy.

Dictionary A.P. Evgenoeva defines anger as a sense of strong indignation, perturbation, irritation states, angry. In this synonymic series, none of the definitions has no definition, according to the dictionary M.V. Lviv, "Equivalent" Antonym. But the antonym to the emotions of "evil", close by the meaning to "angling", is "good" ("kindness"); That is, the concept of kindness is also one of the essential characteristics of tolerance.

Thus, based on the above definitions of tolerance with a positive assessment of this moral quality and its positive assessment of this moral quality and its social necessity At various stages of the development of society and at the moment, in particular, considering various points of view on the concept of tolerance and allocating the main essential characteristics of this moral quality of the personality - respect, sympathy, kindness, it can be concluded that it is necessary to form a socio-cultural tolerance as a moral quality of personality in The interests of the success of the "cultural" dialogue and in order to avoid intercultural conflicts with various social, cultural groups or their representatives.

1.2 Formation of pedagogy tolerance in foreign and domestic science

Pedagogical ideas of tolerance are contained in the works of many teachers of the past and present. So, representatives of free upbringing in the face of J.-H. Rousseau, M. Montessori, L.N. Tolstoy, K.N. Wentsells have repeatedly expressed ideas close to the ideas of tolerance.

Views J.-zh. Rousseau is permeated with confidence in the personal development of the child, the presentation of full freedom, which is possible to perfectly implement in isolation from society. An adult was allocated the second roles with the active role of the child. In its program work "Emil, or about the upbringing" J.-Zh. Rousseau defines one of the important tasks of education - the upbringing of good by raising good judgments, feelings, will. J.-H. Rousseau categorically refused punishment, coarse educational influences. Several similar to M. Montessori's views, which actualizes the ideas of freedom in the personal manifestations of the child. An active role belongs to the independence of children. The role of an adult lies in observation and non-interference in the natural development of the child: "... The manager should make every effort so as not to violate the principle of freedom of the child. Calling on his side the slightest effort, it is no longer able to figure out the scaffolding of the child ... It is impossible to insist, repeating the lesson, you can not feel the child that he was not mistaken or did not understand because she would make his effort - to understand and thereby disrupt That natural state of it. " Thus, the pedagogical views of M. Montessori are distinguished by trust and delicate attitude towards the mental well-being of children, careful non-self-effect on the part of the teacher.

Indicatory from the point of view of a delicate relationship to the personal development of a child Pedagogical ideas L.N. Tolstoy. He advocates respect for the rights of the child, proclaiming the principles of nationality, humanity, democratism. These principles are intended to provide a teacher. L.N. Tolstoy great importance to the personal and moral qualities of the teacher, among which the leading place belongs to love for children and chosen creativity of the pedagogical path. L.N. Tolstoy expressed categorically against coercion, hard disciplinary influences: "If the teacher has only love for business, he will be a good teacher. If the teacher has only love for a student, like a father, mother, he will be better than a teacher who read all the books, but does not have love either towards the students. If the teacher connects love of business and to the disciples, he is a perfect teacher. "

The most important importance for pedagogy tolerances have the views of the famous Russian teacher K.N. Ventcel. They proclaim the principles of maximum development of the creative possibilities of a child on the basis of respect for his personality and reporting freedom in actions and desires. K.N. Ventce was an opponent for forcing influence. In its main work, "The ideal school of the future and the ways to implement it" K.N. Ventcel essentially proclaims one of the principles of tolerance through the "Will Development by Free Action and by Independent Creativity, because the will is a factor of mental life." K.N. The ventilation proposed somewhat innovative for pedagogy of the pore of the ideas: writing his tutorial, where his knowledge would be united, the active position of the child as a researcher, a small seeker of truth; Improving the teachings.

Of particular interest in the point of view of introducing into the pedagogical practice of the principles of tolerance is given to Valdorf pedagogy. One of the principles of training and education of the guys, the creation of a Waldorf system as a whole, the moral properties of the educators is the name of tolerance; At one time, the proclaimed R. Steiner and has a continuation of his followers.

"It is worth thinking about the consequences arising from two provisions - the commitment of its own position and an understanding of the position of others. Only from this approach implies the ability of people to social cooperation. But no external trust does not achieve this. The desire to interact should proceed from the depths of the human soul. When, divided into different religious groups in accordance with the wishes of the parents, students together with the teachers differ in their classes, we see how the principle of tolerance is carried out, and this forms the same position among schoolchildren. "

Contributable can be called the views of L.S. Vygotsky in relation to the pedagogy of tolerance. On the one hand, hp Vygotsky expresses a hard position on the problem of interaction between teacher and children, teaching them compares with "War", on the other hand, hp Vygotsky expresses humanistic ideas regarding training and education of children: "... the authoritarian principle must be destroyed ... obedience must be replaced by free social coordination."

One of bright representatives Soviet pedagogy is V.A. Sukhomlinsky. At the heart of his views, in fact, lie humanistic ideas of tolerance. He wrote: "In our hands, the greatest of them of all values \u200b\u200bof the world is a man." The teacher lies a huge responsibility for the formation of a person, so it is extremely important to be sensitive, delicate to a developing person, tolerable to its disadvantages, which is achieved through love and relevant attitude towards the younger generation: "... The real love of the teacher to pupils - a huge, irreversible desire to give them What is in you good for you ".

In his work "Pavlyshskaya Central School" V.A. Sukhomlinsky proclaimed postulates of ethical behavior of pupils, among them the active position of the author against the tolerant attitude towards evil: "Do not be indifferent to the evil. Bring against evil, deception, injustice. Be impact to the one who seeks to live at the expense of other people, causes evil to other people. " This seems the boundary of the permissible, where dignity is a measure of tolerance: "Know that there is a border between what you want, and what you can. Check your actions as a question yourself: Do you do evil, inconvenience to people? " .

Ideas of tolerance B. modern pedagogy There are in the works of teachers - innovators, such as Sh.A. Amonashvili, E.N. Ilyin, S.I. Lysenkova, V.F. Shatalov and many others. So, for example, S.A. Amonashvili In the process of managing training and education of children, unconditional rules are introduced, here are some of them: the adoption of the personality of each child, accounting for the individual characteristics of children, education and training with the position of respect, dignity and faith in the resources of the guys, joint creation of an atmosphere of cooperation, comparability, co-creation.

In the domestic science and practice, the ideas of tolerance are implemented in pedagogy of cooperation, pedagogy of success, dialogue pedagogy, non-violence pedagogy.

Extremely close to pedagogy tolerance of the idea of \u200b\u200bpedagogy non-violence.

The direction of "Pedagogy of non-violence" relatively recently emerged in domestic science. Pedagogy of non-violence is the movement of progressive teachers who oppose various forms of coercion of children and young people based on the principle of a personal approach; This is a direction focused on the formation of the growing sense of the position of non-violence, which is expressed in the ability to build their relations with the outside world, nature, other people on a non-violent basis. As specific tasks, non-violence pedagogy are two interrelated blocks:

1) Tasks associated with the education of the growing generation of peace-loving, the spirit of non-violence;

2) Tasks associated with the humanization of the learning and education process, the interaction of adults and children.

Tolerance in the perspective of the direction under consideration is considered one of the psychological conditions for the adoption of the position of non-violence, an important personal property of the teacher, the leader. The founders of the directions of A.G. Kozlova, V.G. Maralov, V.A. Sitarov offer to start with preschool childhood through training and exposure development, in the younger school age Through the formation of elements of tolerance, in adolescence and senior school age - through the development of tolerance.

Of foreign literature The work of A. Oil, K. Rogers, D. Freiberga, S. Fren, J. Kolt, S. Maddi, are of the greatest interest. Let's analyze some of them.

The humanistic views of the self-actualizing personality A. Masau are based on a man's desire to become who he can become: "People must be who they can be, they should be true to their nature." According to A. Maslow, self-actualizing is any option to implement abilities in activities. People who are not aware of their potential, "existent" values, suffer low self-esteem, fears, anxieties, protective mechanisms. The task of the head, the teacher is to cope with underestimated self-esteem, fears, anxieties, defensive, feel "existential", existential values \u200b\u200band to realize their capabilities. Then any impact guided by the educator, the head, the teacher from the outside, will lose the relevance, because it will be replaced by internal self-government and self-development. Psychologically healthy children will be able to educate psychologically adults. A. Masu claimed that the main goal of the teacher is to help the child to discover what is laid in it, then realize its potential in activities. To do this, it is necessary to create an atmosphere that stimulates personal growth and throughout the educational process compliance with certain conditions. First, all their behavior demonstrate confidence in children, take into account their inner motivation to the teaching, feel and understand the mood children's team, openly express your feelings.

Psychotherapy K. Rogers about the unconditional adoption of the client, empathic understanding and the preguentity of the psychotherapist have a practical sound in pedagogy. K. Rogers formulated the thesis about the personal experience of the child in training. The teacher is assigned the role of the facilitator, i.e. A person who contributes to the effective and efficient implementation of the group educational process and action. Pedagogue - the facilitator is designed to stimulate the personal growth of the pupil, creating special conditions: complete adoption, understanding, congruence. If students face a high level of understanding, care and sincerity, they will learn more and better behave than when they deal with a low level of support. It is very important to relate to students as "feeling and conscious human beings."

The concept of "effective upbringing" D. Dinkmayer and G.D. McKame is built on confident adult communication in resolving problematic situations with children. Effective education gives an educator with an opportunity for better orientation in a child, in itself and in the process of education, educational cooperation with greater confidence in itself and stability towards the child, creating strong, developing and supporting relationships with a child, maintaining the ability to action in problem situations everyday education.

R. Draikurs called courageous people who recognize their imperfection. The basis of self-confidence is the courage to recognize your imperfection. If an adult can accept his imperfection and rely on the ability to improve, it acts soothing and stabilizing the child. "The consciousness of one's own imperfection does not imply it as an exclusive argument with (criminal and other) negligence and when repetition of errors. This approach gives certain confidence (from possible reproaches), but has a negative pedagogical effect (because he teaches the child to resort to excuses). "

B.E. The following actual problems of pedagogy of tolerance are set: the features of tolerant behavior in the class, how to train tolerance and from which it develops, proposed approaches to learning various types of tolerance in elementary school and others. "Three super-walled educational objectives: (1) Teach live in a multi-cable world, (2) to teach constructively to resolve conflicts, (3) to raise responsibility," the author believes it is necessary to devote to classes with students. The teacher assumes a big hope in the cultivation of tolerant ideas in schools, among pupils and their parents. The joint efforts of the administration, teachers, children, parents, the public, etc., the author believes, you can build tolerant relations in society and in the whole world.

Thus, the progressive pedagogical thought of both the domestic school and foreign authors has always been permeated with the ideas of humanism, resisted the violent manipulative effect on the part of adults and physically and in spiritual terms. Turning changes observed in the public life of Russia are prioritizing the "soft" tolerant management of the formation of all participants in the educational space.

1.3 Investigation of problems of tolerance in psychology

Humanistic philosophy and psychology are methodological basis Tolerance and tolerance. First of all, it is the work of A. Masu, M. Buber, K. Rogers, V. Frankl, G. Allport, Psychology for forgiveness, psychology and pedagogy non-violence. For M. Buber Tolerance is an integral part of the dialogue between "I" and "You", at which a genuine meeting is happening in relationships, positions, opportunities, etc.

In the context of the theory of "Healthy Personality" A. Oil Tolerance acts as one of the leading principles, which gives the key to understanding the essence of a person explaining the specifics of the interaction of people. This principle is at least twice. First, it can be concluded that tolerance is one of the possible ways of self-actual personality, especially relevant this thought sounds when the butter speaks of self-actualization as the possibility of choosing, personal growth, the ability to accept itself and other people as they are, the possibilities in Establishing with the surrounding friendly personal relationships.

The principle of tolerance is rather pronounced in the direction of the concept of a "full-ficked personality" and non-media therapy K. Rogers. Assist another person, in particular in solving problems that arise from him, it is possible not directly, but relying on the desire of a person to freedom and to positive changes. This becomes possible due to the unconditional adoption of a person, an empathic understanding and congruence, as a result, the tendency of the person to self-actualization is stimulated, the realistic idea of \u200b\u200boneself, withdrawing the contradictions between the "real i" and "Ideal I", and, therefore, a more humane, tolerable attitude towards himself and surrounding.

According to V. Frankl, who shows the path of spiritual development of a person moving along the path of searching and implementing meanings, tolerance is assigned the role of an integral component of this development, since this development is a holistic nature expressed in comprehending the values \u200b\u200bof creation, experiences, relationships, and deployed in the direction Freedom, independence, flexible response to changing life situations.

According to G. Allport, human development occurs in relationship with society. G. AllPort highlights six criteria for mature personality:

1) Wide borders "I" as the ability to look at yourself from the side and social activity;

2) the ability to warm cardiac social relations (including tolerance);

3) emotional disassemblence and self-confidence (the ability to cope with its own emotional state);

4) realistic perception, experience and claims;

5) the ability to self-knowledge and a sense of humor;

Thus, tolerance, or tolerance, is a vital personality property.

From the position of the "Psychology of Forgiveness", developed by R. Al-Mabuch, M. Santos, R. Enterite, Tolerance is given a central role in the Board of forgiveness.

Manifestations of forgiveness B. interpersonal relationship Can be defined as a solution:

1. Refuse negative thoughts, emotions and behavioral manifestations against a person who has undeserved offense;

2. Encourage positive thoughts, emotions and behavioral manifestations regarding the same offender, that is, showing tolerance;

It is quite complete tolerance is considered in "Psychology and Pedagogy of non-violence", developed by V.G. Maralov, V.A. Sitar.

Non-violence is considered by the authors as an ideological, ethical and life principle, which is based on the recognition of the values \u200b\u200bof the whole life, man and his life; Decitation of coercion as a way to interact a person with the world, nature, other people, a method for solving political, moral, economic and interpersonal problems and conflicts, approval and strengthening the desire of everything living to positive self-refining. The basic concept of this direction of humanistic science is the adoption of the position of non-violence. The authors allocate psychological conditions for the acquisition of the personality of the position of non-violence: the adoption of his own personality; overcoming psychological protection; awareness of the level of own egocentrism and the acquisition of association; Formation of tolerance. Tolerance acts as an internal flexible mechanism for the existence of the position of non-violence, it is oriented to another person, acceptance and understanding it in comparison with him and its views. Mastering tolerance is an expression of personal maturity.

Tolerance and tolerance features. One of the central psychology is the question of what is the role of tolerance in the interaction of a person with the world and other people, what are their functions.

V.A. Petritsky highlights the following functions of tolerance and tolerance. In the framework of individual morality, tolerance performs communicative and orientational-heuristic functions. Tolerance makes it possible to understand the partner to communicate, joint activities, optimizes the process of communication. In the framework of public morality V.A. Petritsky highlights gnoseological, prognostic and preventive functions. Integrating the dedicated V.A. Petritsky function of tolerance, which are not fully limited to those listed, add a syndicative function that finds its expression in the cohesion of large and small groups; broadcast, necessary to fulfill joint activities, training, knowledge transmission, activities, etc.; Adaptive, providing for adaptation to adverse environmental factors; active function as an opportunity to change someone else's opinion, behavior, other person, but without the use of means of coercion; And the function of congruent-empathic. A person who has a developed empathia that can understand and take not only herself, but also a partner to communicate, has genuine congruence, oriented to self-esteem and respect for others, combines the internal freedom of personality and self-sufficiency.

Features of tolerance and tolerance. In the works of G.U. Soldana, E.M. Makarova, G.allport is described as activity, equality, mutual respect, cooperation and solidarity, positive vocabulary, psychological sustainability, versatility, etc.

Types of tolerance and tolerance. A.V. Zimbuli, V.A. Petritsky allocated the following types of tolerance, with whose characteristics you can agree. Under quasiberiability ("Quasi" (lat) - as if, imaginary, illusory, unreal) understands the types of restraint in contacts, cognitive, affective, motivational-value and behavioral reactions and estimates, externally protruding as tolerance . For example, the restrained behavior of the teacher with respect to the magnificent behavior of the student, the son of the School Director. A.V. Zimbuli under pseudo-absorption ("Pseudos" (Greek) - false, pretend) understands the cases of restraint in emotional situations in order to deliberately introduce anyone in confusion, for example, the manifestation of restraint for the purpose of cold calculation and personal benefits, hypocrisy, pretending behavior and behavior ratings.

The difference between quasi-pepiness and pseudo-performance can be metaphorically to imagine as a distinction between the illusion, sick or very rich nontrivial imagination and deception.

Negative tolerance allocated V.A. Petritsky, its essence determines the motives of indifference, passivity, indifference, malicious non-interference, displacement cynicism.

The listed types of tolerance are indicated by the term tolerance. Motives of attention, understanding, sympathy cause positive tolerance. Given the results of restrained behavior, distinguish between moral and destructive and moral and structural tolerance, i.e. Positively motivated manifestations of tolerance leading to negative or positive results.

Forms of tolerance, tolerance, intolerance. Types of tolerance, tolerance, intolerance are manifested in forms. Forms are methods for manifestation of a tolerant, tolerant or intolerant relationship.

Forms of expression of a tolerant, tolerant, intolerant relationship can be allocated depending on the position that the object occupies in the process of interaction.

Among the variety of approaches to understanding the position: dominance, equality, submission; "Parent", "Adult", "Baby"; "Top", "nearby", "bottom" - we choose the latest as the most versatile and neutral, although we use some characteristics of the positions from the typology of E. Bern.

When being brought in position "from above", tolerance acts as condescension, unbearability, the patronage resolution of something, patronage, guardianship.

The tolerant attitude in the position "top" acts as arrogance, pronounced or veiled arrogance, dishes.

In the position "Next", tolerance acts as patience, patience. Patience involves the manifestation of excerpts, self-control, self-control and manifests itself as the ability to do something long, persistently, stubbornly, as the ability to own themselves. The basis of patience is based on the patience.

Intolerance with equality is manifested as detraction, indifference, indifference, indifference, alienation. In behavior, these characteristics are manifested in the form of conscious ignoring what irritates, contradicts its own views. In the position "below", the tolerance takes shapes of custody, the readiness, politely humble relationship, readiness to obey someone else's will, meekness, innovation, encouraging. When intolerably, a rejection of emotional response, aggression, reaction, anger, gloating, an open dislike, the desire to act actively, fight - to make hooligan, not amenable to logic, analysis and common sense, explain the actions: swear, scream, fight, to inflict physical Material and moral damage, insection, etc.

Borders of tolerance and tolerance. It should be noted that the problem of studying the boundaries of tolerance is not discussed. A.V. Zimbuli highlights three factors of moral measures of tolerance: concreteness (social background, internal condition of a person, a sharp contrast between perceived fact and expectations, etc.), instrumentality (conjugateness with others moral values), internal tension. The border is determined by the specifics of the personality of tolerance or tolerance. Speaking of tolerance, the person has the right to show the tolerant attitude to everything, if it does not threaten the person, the team, society. In the event of a threat in the form of physical action, ideology, the boundaries of tolerance are narrowed, the person has the right to show coercion within the framework of existing laws. With border tolerance, it is wider: a person is indifferent to what is happening until it concerns him. Thus, with tolerance, the threshold of the sensitivity of the personality is reduced, i.e. Tolerance acts as a passive reaction form. Tolerance implies the presence of restraint, patient, understanding and, ultimately, adoption. The expansion of consciousness from restraint - a resistant to the adoption of the "other", "other" than "I", makes the world-seeming more multidimensional, holistic, and therefore more adequate reality.

Chapter 2. State-legal regulation of tolerance problems in modern society

2.1 Analysis of legal acts on tolerance issues

In the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination on the basis of religion or belief, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on November 25, 1981, it is said that the dignity and equality are inherent in each person and that all Member States pledged to take joint and independent activities in collaboration with UN to facilitate and promote general respect and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinguishing races, gender, language or religion. In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants on Human Rights, the principles of non-discrimination and equality are proclaimed to law and the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or beliefs. It is also said that ignoring and violation of human rights about fundamental freedoms, in particular the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or beliefs of any kind, are directly or indirectly caused war and heavy suffering of humanity, especially when they serve as a means of foreign intervention in Internal affairs of other states and lead to inciting hatred between nations and states.

The Declaration of Tolerance Principles, adopted by the UN General Assembly on November 16, 1995 takes into account the relevant international acts, including:

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;

International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination;

The Convention on the Prevention of Crimes of Genocide and Punishment for Him;

Convention on the Rights of the Child;

1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees, as well as the 1997 Protocol regarding refugee status, as well as regional legal acts in this area;

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women;

Convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment,

Declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief;

Declaration on the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities;

Declaration on measures to eliminate international terrorism;

Vienna Declaration and Program of Action, adopted at the World Summit in the Interests of Social Development held in Copenhagen;

Declaration of UNESCO about race and racial prejudices;

Article 2 states that in order to make society more tolerant, States should ratify the existing international conventions on human rights and, if necessary, to develop new legislation to ensure the equal approach and equality of opportunities for all groups and individuals in society .

In the Declaration and Program of Action in the field of culture of the world, it is said that the more complete development of the culture of the world is inextricably linked to the elimination of all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

In the Millennium Millennium Declaration, adopted at the Millennium Summit of September 6-8, 2000. A number of fundamental values \u200b\u200bare described, which will be essential for international relations in the 21st century: freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance (with all the variety of religion, cultures and languages, people must respect each other; the culture of peace and dialogue between all civilizations should be actively encouraged ), respect for nature, common duty.

At the World Conference on the Fight against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and the Related Intolerance, which was held in Durban (South Africa) on August 7 - September 7, 2001. The emphasis was made that "We are all - one human family, This truth becomes now the self-evident in the light of the initial decryption of the human genotype - an outstanding achievement, which not only once again confirms our human community, but also promises to transform scientific thought and practice, as well as the idea of \u200b\u200bour human race about himself. " This declaration on the vision of the future, initiated by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the General Secretary of the World Conference against Racism Mary Robinson, with the patronage of Nelson Mandela, was signed by the heads of 75 countries.

Civil and political rights. Incompatibility of democracy and racism.

From the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights at the 58th session of the UN Human Rights Commission on February 7, 2002: "... The World Conference on Racism Combat, Racial Discrimination confirmed that democracy is necessary to effectively prevent racism and related intolerance and their liquidation. "

The World Conference has expressed concern that racist and xenophobic programs again receive political, moral and even legal recognition by many ways, including through some political parties and organizations. The conference emphasized the key role that politicians can play in the fight against such evil, as racism, xenophobia and intolerance associated with them. She called on political parties to take concrete steps to encourage equality, solidarity and non-discrimination.

The proposals approved by the World Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and the Related Intolerance.

Right and politics. The conference urged a general ratification by the 2005 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, as well as the review of all reservations. She also recommended a number of legislative, judicial, regulatory, administrative and other measures at the national level in order to prevent racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and protection against them. These include the adoption of the following:

a) constitutional, legislative and administrative measures to facilitate equality, including consideration, correction and abolition of national legislation and administrative provisions that can lead to discrimination;

b) national strategy, action plans, legislation and administrative measures to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;

c) legislative and administrative strategies, as well as other preventive measures to protect certain groups of workers;

d) effective strategies and programs to prevent and attract responsibility for misdeemining police officers and other law enforcement agencies, including persecution in courts of persons who have committed such misconduct;

e) measures aimed at eliminating racial orientation.

State institutions, Allowing to resolve disagreements through dialogue, also play an important role in ensuring the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups. The conference recommended creating and strengthening already existing independent national institutions in order to fight racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and assistance to victims.

Civil society. The conference also recognized the fundamental role that civil society plays in the fight against racism and in stimulating public interest. She also noted that promoting a higher degree of mutual respect and trust between various groups within a society should be a common, but differentiated responsibility of state institutions, political leaders, lower organizations and citizens.

Media. The media, be it audiovisual, electronic or printed, play an important role in democratic societies. Recognizing a positive contribution made by the media into the struggle against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and the associated intolerance. The World Conference noted with regret that some media, creating an incorrect idea of \u200b\u200bvulnerable groups and individuals, in particular migrants and refugees, and forming negative stereotypes, contribute to the spread of xenophobia and racist sentiment in the Company and in some cases encourage racist-minded violence and groups.

Education. It is impossible to overestimate the important role of education in ensuring awareness and promotion of respect and tolerance in order to prevent racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and the associated intolerance and combating them. The World Conference, held in Durban, again emphasized not only the importance of access to education without any discrimination, but also the role of human rights education in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and in strengthening mutual understanding between all Cultures and civilizations.

Decisions of the Budapest CSCE Summit 1994.

States parties condemn the manifestations of intolerance, especially aggressively nationalism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism, and will further promote effective measures aimed at eradicating them. They decided that appropriate measures should be taken to more effectively prevent racist collections and other violent manifestations of intolerance against migrant workers and their families. They positively appreciate the action plan for racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and intolerance. Taking further steps in the light of the Declaration of the Roman Meeting of the Council, the CSCE Institutions will explore opportunities to work together with the Council of Europe, as well as with the UN and other international organizations.

The federal target program "Formation of plants of tolerant consciousness and prevention of extremism in Russian society" (for 2001-2005).

The purpose of the program is to form and implement the norms of tolerant behavior, defining and social groups in various situations of social tension as the basis of civil consent in a democratic state. The program consists of the following subprograms: 1) "Personality", includes the development and implementation of all steps and educational materials into the education system, bringing up the younger generation in the spirit of tolerance; Development of insurance mechanisms as a social institution for constructing security motivation; 2) "Family", which includes the development and implementation of a complex of measures to improve social role families in education in the younger generation of tolerance; 3) "Society", which includes the development and implementation of a complex of measures to promote peace-loving, an increase in resistance to ethnic, religious conflicts; 4) "State", including a set of activities that ensure an increase in the effectiveness of state policy to reduce social and psychological tensions in society; 5) "Organizational and Information Provision", which includes the development and implementation of a set of measures to improve the effectiveness of the program implementation, including international cooperation. In Moscow once a year, according to this program in schools, the "Day of Tolerance" is held. There are no such events in Kaluga, respectively, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe Moscow region should be adopted by the Kaluga region.

The absence of a tolerant climate in today's Russian society contributes to the emergence of social tension in the country, various conflicts (inter-ethnic, interreligious and so on.), Manifestations of extremism, great chauvinism, outbreaks of Russophobia. Effective opposition to these negative socio-political phenomena is possible in carrying out a whole system of measures. The effectiveness of the state and public activities It depends in many respects from the implementation of the principles of tolerant behavior, on real observance of tolerance in various areas of life. Thus, in the Declaration of the Principles of Tolerance, adopted by the 28th session of the UNESCO General Conference on November 16, 1995, it is argued that "tolerance is primarily an active attitude, formed on the basis of the recognition of universal rights and fundamental freedoms of man ..."; That "tolerance is a concept that means the refusal of dogmatism, from the absolutization of truth and the approving norms established in international legal acts in the field of human rights ...".

2.2 The role of religion in the formation of tolerance

For gradual distribution in the Russian society of the Spirit and the principles of tolerance, the ubiquitous statement in it is important in it, attitudes towards followers of any religious or secular flow, ideological systems without their discrimination, infringement of religious rights, ideological signs.

The relevance and difficulties of ensuring religious tolerance in modern Russia are due to a number of circumstances: negative historical traditions (the issues of freedom of conscience were often solved in the country in favor of the political interests of the state, parties); complex polyconfessional (about 70 religious flows) and polyethnic (more than 150 ethnic groups) composition of the population; The need for regular efforts to maintain suspended relationships between different religions (Orthodoxy - Islam, Orthodoxy - Judaism, Islam - Judaism, etc.), confessions (Orthodoxy - Catholicism, Orthodoxy - Protestantism, Protestantism - Catholicism, etc.), between traditional religions and new, including esoteric, religious formations, between believers (45% of the population), unbelieving and other worldview groups of the population (more than half of Russians - unbelievers, indifferent to faith and disbelief or underestimate in their worldviews); not exhibited by the practice of violation of the constitutional norms by officials; manifestations among certain groups of the population, including in the youth medium, extremism and various forms of intolerance in relation to one or another beliefs and ethnic groups, etc.

For our country, the bitterness of national strife, ethnic egoism, even ethnophobia has recently, is of particular importance to the position of religious organizations, the attitude of believers to the listed issues. It is even more important that nationalist, extremist groupings in the center and in the field, local elites in their struggle for power and material privileges are invariably used in one way or another religion, thereby generating interethnic and interfaith tension. And this is a game with fire. After all, if there are collisions on religious grounds to existing ethnic contradictions and conflict, then the consequences (as evidenced by the sad experience of Olster, India, Pakistan, Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo) can be tragic. Fortunately, thanks to the traditional religious tolerance in Russia, sensible religious leaders, their moral authority was largely neutralized attempts to the full use of a religious factor in criminal purposes with ethnocratically tuned and extremist groups. It suggests that bloody events in Chechnya at the junction of 20 and 21 centuries. Contrary to the desire of separatists did not exceed the religious war, although the religious factor is used in every way terrorists to substantiate their criminal actions.

The general positive tolerant attitude in the relationship between representatives of various Russian ethnic and religious communities is invariably a confirmation in the answers to many questions. So, when surveyed 2001, a newly low percentage of respondents (3.6%) considered that other religion had a negative impact on his attitude towards another person. True, almost as much (3.2%) found that this circumstance has positive influenceBut the basic mass proceeds from the fact that the attitude towards another person has no other religion of any influence (73.7%).

In this mass indifference, both believers and unbelievers - to the issues of faith in interpersonal relations should not see any negative moments. On the contrary, what seems to be a certificate of non-interference for normal personal relationships, despite the ideological differences. Such approval of tolerant, rational principles can be considered a serious indicator of the democraticness of our society, the lack of prejudice against it against representatives of other ethnocon confessional communities. Based on the fact that the feelings constituting the "triad of hostility" - anger, disgust, contempt, are the essential characteristics of the concept of "intolerance" as a concept, antonymic "tolerance", it can be assumed that the essential characteristics of "tolerance" are concepts opposite to The feelings constituting the "triad of hostility".

The strength of this position allows you to clarify the answers to the questions regarding a number of household situations where ethnocon confessional factors are present. As follows from the table (polling data of 2001, similar results were recorded and previous studies), the believing in God are still more than that of unbelievers, household tolerance is manifested (see Appendix No. 3).

In general, the monitoring results show that public opinion is interested in the dialogue of followers of different confidence and worldviews, in the elimination of prejudice and especially extremist manifestations in interpersonal relations, in approving the principles of tolerance and cooperation in the name of a common good. At the same time, polls reflected the concern of respondents with the state of interethnic relationships. The overwhelming majority of respondents (about 80%) are confident that the tension in this area can lead to collapse Russian state. This opinion is characteristic of all ideological and confessional groups.

Especially acutely existing interethnic and interfaith problems are manifested in the youth environment. So, it deserves close attention to the high level of intolerance, manifested by the youngest age group (16017-year-old) to a number of nationalities. The share of the youngest, negatively related to other ethnic groups and other religions, 1.5 - 2.5 times higher than in the older age groups.

Education in the spirit of tolerance and countering extremism depends on the objective and multilateral accounting of today's realities, from the ability to rely on positive spiritual and social traditions and neutralize negative factors; The nature of legislation on religious issues, the practice of its implementation is important.

Modern Russian legislation in principle ensures the equality of various religious associations before the law, eliminates discrimination on religious motives, creates conditions for the situation of tolerance, mutual cooperation of followers of all religious directions. In practice, the impairment of the spirit and the letter of legislation on freedom of conscience is largely related to the fact that the Russian society (with all the cardinal ideological, legal, political changes of the last time) remains at the same level of mass culture, civilization, with one and the same traditions , Including tolerance for an administrative personary. It is appropriate to emphasize that the effectiveness of any law largely depends on the interest of society in its implementation, from the conscious need for its application. The absence of such "objective" prerequisites increases the possibilities of violation of tolerance, affects the behavior of officials, in the activities of local authorities, in interfaith relations. There are often cases of the manifestation of preferences of one (as a rule, the most common) religion, which entails the infringement of the interests of others, there are arbitrary actions of local administrations, which aggravates the ethnoconduction contradictions, generates unlawful excesses.

For a public mood, shared by the overwhelming part of the Russian population, is characterized by a loyal attitude towards people of other beliefs and beliefs, willingness tolerance, goodwill, cooperation in various fields - from life to politics. Unlike some religious leaders, the majority of the population (more than 70%) does not agree with the idea of \u200b\u200bexclusivity, the only truth of one or another religion, especially with performances against other religions.

Tolerant international education is a multifaceted process. Here, the appeal to each aspect of the problem requires serious attention and tact. It, in particular, implies the exact use of the name of ethnic groups and state-territorial entities (for example, Tatarstan, and not the Tataria, Bashkortostan, not Bashkiria), the exclusion of any prejudice against any ethnic group, the argued criticism of some of those who received the distribution of stereotypes, prejudices and myths, even Incorrect interpretations of terms, for example, such as "ethnic crime." Debunk of similar myths, showing that usually criminal groups are completed from representatives of different nationalities- An important prerequisite prerequisite tolerance.

Such myths include the exceptional threat of "Islamic Extremism" in Russia. First, the desire to cover with religious ideas to justify their illegal actions in the world is observed in many countries where various religions are distributed. So, in Olster or Croatia, opposed the adherents of Christian denominations. And the most important thing is that Islam as religion can not be extremist. Another thing is to distribute radicalism among the Muslim youth of Russia, the separatist rate for the use of Islam to justify extremism and terrorism. However, the reasons for the spread of these ideas among young people are not in Islam, but to a greater extent in the living conditions of the followers of this religion in a particular region of the country. According to research, it is among the Muslim youth that there is a level of unemployment, lower than the standard of living, they have great difficulties in adapting to modern realities, including due to paternalistic Muslim traditions; Patriarchalically educated Islamic young people are painful than followers of other religions, is experiencing the crisis of traditional values \u200b\u200band lifestyle.

Chapter 3. Socio-pedagogical conditions for solving problems of tolerance in modern society

3.1 The main directions of work on the formation of tolerant relations

Due to the relevance of a comprehensive study of human rights problems and tolerance, the question arises: Do there be necessary systems in the country, mechanisms for their security, protection? Among these are the following: judicial protection, non-judicial protection and activities of non-governmental human rights organizations (NGOs). It is indicative that, according to experts, only about one third of Russians have real opportunities to protect their rights in case of their violation. There is also less opportunity for this in residents of the North-Western, Central, North Caucasus regions of the country. The problem of protecting its rights is facing most social groups, among which are indigenous small peoples of the North, entrepreneurs, Russians living abroad, refugees and forced displaceders, prisoners, military personnel, pensioners, women and children, disabled people and other socially vulnerable segments of the population.

The democratic system of protecting human rights assumes the opportunity for any citizen to contact the courts of various instances. The judicial system is the most effective mechanism for restoring violated rights; It is the main structure to protect human rights at the national level.

The mechanisms of non-judicial protection of human rights belong: the Institute of Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation and the Commissioners for Human Rights in the Subjects of the Federation; Commission on Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation; Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation; College of lawyers, ministries and departments of the Russian Federation, etc.

The missing link in the mechanism of ensuring human rights in Russia is the activities of non-governmental human rights organizations (NGOs). And, first of all, because there is no common information source in the field of human rights, affordable lawyers, journalists, all interested parties and organizations. Databases extending on a commercial basis cannot solve problems, because They do not have a special "human rights" orientation, usually do not contain materials of international level, sold at a high price and are not, therefore, publicly available. Human rights defenders need to draw attention to human rights violations. In many countries of the world, public campaigns organized by NGOs represent a powerful tool for the struggle for human rights and freedoms, a serious argument for the authorities. There is no such practice in Russia.

Important importance in the practical implementation of human rights activities and the establishment of tolerant relations in society has education and education in families, schools, universities. Education in the spirit of tolerance is very significant for raising the self-assessment of the personality, the formation of a citizen, peaceful neighboring of different peoples, different nationalities, people of different faith and various political and other beliefs. According to the participants of sociological surveys, teachers of schools and teachers of universities, the situation with human rights education is satisfactory only in part. First of all, because the scientific foundations of such teaching are not developed. There is still no special interest from competent structures in the introduction of special courses on citizen and human rights, an active study of international legal instruments.

Universal respect and observance of human rights in Russia is impossible to achieve without a radical fracture in the distribution of knowledge about human rights and the cardinal update of secondary and higher education in this area. Therefore, the Commission on Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation stands for the creation of a public-public federal center of information and to promote human rights education, democracy and culture of the world - as the All-Russian Coordination Center for the Organization of Effective Distribution of Information on Human Rights, Development of the Concept and Program of Preparation and Retraining Program for Rights A person for various categories of civil servants at all levels of formal and informal learning.

In connection with the problem under consideration, the question arises about the place and role of those or other state and public structures in ensuring human rights and in the formation of tolerant relations. It is not interesting that, first of all, the polls are called non-governmental human rights organizations, in the second - the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, to the third is the system of school and higher education. Next follow the institutions of culture, the media. At the stage below - federal bodies, religious organizations. And in the last place - federal authorities, legislative and executive bodies of the authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Obviously, the latter of these issues are engaged in extremely few.

As for the urgent problems, which are designed to solve all these structures, then among the priority measures the following is possible:

· Enter B. educational standards Knowledge of human rights and freedoms;

· Develop a federal target program of education and education in the field of human rights;

· Prepare a variety of information and teaching and methodological literature for teachers and students;

· Prepare specialized computer databases for human rights;

· Prepare and disseminate informational materials for human rights and other public organizations;

· Develop approximate educational programs for universities in the field of human rights;

· Prepare and disseminate information materials for civil servants;

· To introduce and promote regulatory and legislative acts that limit and prohibit the manifestations of interstitivity (extremism, chauvinism, nationalism, xenophobia, etc.), to achieve their adoption;

· Special attention should be paid to the creation of a tolerant climate in the regions, in particular in the youth-student environment, in relations between representatives of various political parties and social movements.

Interestingly, in a number of regions there are already targeted programs for solving such tasks that seek to comprehensively approach the problem. Thus, in the Kama region there is a law of the Perm region about the "Target Program for the Development of the Political and Legal Culture of the Population of the Perm Region for 2002-2006", which includes the section "System of measures to counter political extremism, the formation of political tolerance situations in the region, providing for the organization of youth discussions, intellectual games, etc. events; introduction to the program of educational institutions of special training courses dedicated to religious, ethnic, gender and other aspects of tolerance; holding in universities of "round tables" on the religious aspects of the political life of the Kama region at the present stage; preparation of printed materials (methodical, textbooks, brochures, etc.), containing clarification of the principle of tolerance as an essential element of democratic political culture, etc.

All activities aimed at establishing a tolerant climate in Russian society are eventually aimed at ensuring human rights. They are inextricably interrelated among themselves. Today, issues of extremely important and difficult issues are promoted to the fore. Along with scientific analysis, practical actions are needed to implement the principles of tolerance in the political life of society, the daily life of citizens. Such events could be in all regions, throughout the mill in general. Thus, they would contribute to the strengthening of legal and political tolerant culture in Russia, ensuring human rights and freedoms, and, consequently, social stability.

3.2 Methodical materials on the formation of plants of tolerant consciousness

After analyzing the work of scientists, having familiarized himself with the practice of forming tolerance in the center of "Care", we conclude that the following system of work will be promoted to enhance the efficiency of work in this direction, including exercises, trainings, lectures, discussions, games.

Methods of social work on the formation of tolerant consciousness.

Exercise "What is tolerance".

Tasks: To enable participants to formulate the "scientific concept" of tolerance; Show multi-term concept "tolerance".

Necessary time: 25 minutes.

Auxiliary materials: Definitions of tolerance written in large sheets.

Preparatory stage: Write the definitions of tolerance on large sheets and attach them before starting classes to the chalkboard or walls of the revolving side to the audience.

Definitions of tolerance.

Colorfully write definitions on Watman sheets: on one side "Tolerance is ...", and on the other side - the definitions themselves. Before the start of the classes, attach these sheets onto the board or on those walls so that "tolerance is ..." is written on the front side. After the speeches of representatives of subgroups, turn them with the other party.

Tolerance definitions:

1. Cooperation, spirit of partnership.

2. Willingness to put up with someone else's opinion.

3. Respect of human dignity.

4. Respect for the rights of others.

5. Adopting another as it is.

6. The ability to put yourself in place of another.

7. Respect for the right to be different.

8. Recognition of diversity.

9. Recognition of the equality of others.

10. Tolerance to other people's opinions, beliefs and behavior.

11. Refusal of dominance, harm and violence.

Procedure for conducting. The presenter divides participants into groups of 3-4 people. Each of the groups will have to develop as a result of "brainstorming" its definition of tolerance. Ask participants to include in this definition, what, in their opinion, is the essence of tolerance. The definition should be brief and tank. After discussion, the representative from each group introduces the definition of all participants.

After the discussion in groups, each definition is written out on the board or on big sheet Watman.

After the groups appear their definitions, the lead turns in advance prepared definitions of the "face" to the audience. Participants have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the existing definitions and express their attitude towards them.

Issues for discussion:

What distinguishes each definition?

Is there anything that combines some of the proposed definitions?

What determination is the most successful?

Is it possible to give one definition to the concept of "tolerance"?

In the process of discussion, pay attention to the following points:

The concept of "tolerance" has many parties;

Each of the definitions revealed some of the faces of tolerance.

Exercise "Emblem of tolerance".

Tasks: continuation of work with the definitions of tolerance; The development of fantasy, expressive ways of self-expression.

Necessary time: 20 minutes.

Auxiliary materials: Paper, color pencils or markers, scissors, scotch.

Procedure for conducting. At the previous stage, participants developed their own definitions of tolerance and familiarized themselves with existing ones. The presenter notes that the discussion took place on the intellectual, abstract level. The next exercise will allow you to approach this concept on the other hand, the participants will have to create an emblem of tolerance. Everyone will try to independently draw such an emblem that could be printed on super packages, political documents, national flags ... (the drawing process takes no more than 5 minutes.). After completing the work, the participants consider each other's drawings (for this you can walk around the room). After familiarization with the results of creativity, other participants should be divided into subgroups based on similarities between drawings. It is important that each participant independently decided to join this or that group. Each of the subgroups formed should explain what is common in their drawings, and put forward the slogan, which would reflect the essence of their emblems (discussion - 3-5 min). The final stage of the exercise is a presentation of the emblems of each subgroup.

Tolerant personality (training).

Objective: Give an idea of \u200b\u200bthe peculiarities of the tolerant and intolerant personality and the main differences between them.

Exercise "The features of the tolerant personality".

Objectives: introduce the participants with the main features of the tolerant personality; To enable teenagers to assess the degree of their tolerance.

Necessary time: 15 minutes.

Materials: Replaims of the questionnaire for each participant (see Appendix No. 4).

Preparation: A questionnaire blank with a "B" column on a large sheet is attached to the board or wall.

Procedure for holding . Participants receive the questionnaire forms. The presenter explains that 15 characteristics listed in the questionnaire are characteristic of the tolerant personality.

Instruction: First, in the "A" column, place:

"+" Opposite those three features, which, in your opinion, are most pronounced;

"0" opposite those three features that, in your opinion, are most characteristic of a tolerant personality.

This form will remain with you and no one will know about the results, so you can answer honestly, without looking around.

On the filling of the questionnaire gives 3-5 minutes.

Then the host fills the pre-prepared questionnaire form attached to the board. For this, he asks to raise the hands of those who noted the first quality in the column. The number of responses is calculated by the number of answers for each quality. Those three qualities that scored the greatest number Points, and are the core of the tolerant personality (from the point of view of this group).

As a result of the occupation, participants get the opportunity: to compare the idea of \u200b\u200bthe tolerant personality of each of the members of the group with a general group representation; Compare an idea of \u200b\u200byourself ("+" in the column "A") with a portrait of a tolerant person, created by the group.

Lecture "What is the distinguished by the tolerant personality from the intolerant".

The purpose of the lecture: Familiarization with the ideas of psychologists about the tolerant personality.

Necessary time: 20 minutes.

Procedure: The presenter reads a lecture on the main differences between the tolerant personality from the intolerant.

I and group. Self-knowledge (training).

To be accepted to others - does not mean both all (discussion).

Objective: The formation of a positive self-assessment of students, a positive attitude towards the uniqueness of everyone.

Plan lesson:

Reasoning leading about differences between people.

Next, it is proposed to write 10 phrases on the leaflet, beginning with the words "I want ...", and find a partner with which there are no less than three coincidences. In these subgroups, it is proposed to discuss the inconsistent points (why is it important to write?).

Then it is proposed to remember the situation when "want" participants did not coincide with the intentions of the group, and the further behavior of the participant in this situation. Those interested to offer their own option of possible behavior, explaining why it is important for him personally. The occupation of the discussion on the topic: "Have a idol - what does this mean?".

Summary Classes:

Feel your belonging to the group, want to be like someone, to be accepted by your peers, imitate someone who is more successful to you - this is normal. But it is important to remain ourselves: with your desires, goals, rules, values.

Each of us is unique in its own way and unique. This person is different from the car. It is uniqueness - the most important human dignity. It is the uniqueness of a person attractive. Probably, people are needed and an interesting friend is precisely because they differ from each other. Communicate with the exact cost of a copy is not interesting. Yes, and any copy is always worse than the original. Therefore, the desire to "be like someone" is doomed in advance for failure.

Loneliness (training).

Objective: The formation of an adequate relationship in adolescents to the sensation of their own autonomy as a periodically arising normal state of an exploring personality.

Plan lesson:

Subgroups are invited to create sculptural groups on the topic "loneliness" and offer their situations when a person may experience loneliness. Next, work is carried out on the type of "brainstorming" on the topic: "pros and cons of loneliness."

After that, an exercise on relaxation is offered - the "Temple of Silence" - and students are given the opportunity to make an arbitrary sketch of his personal "temple of silence" (materials for drawing each chooses to its taste).

Exercise "Temple of Silence".

Participants are sitting in convenient poses for them.

Leading: "Imagine yourself to the crowd of a crowded and noisy city on the outskirts. Try to feel how your legs step on the pavement, hear the sounds of transport, the voices of the crowd, the sounds of your and other steps ... What else do you hear? Pay attention to other passersby. There are many of them, very much. They merge into one solid stream. But you can stay on some expressions of individuals, figures ... Maybe you see something else? Pay attention to shop windows, kiosks ... Maybe you see somewhere in the crowd familiar faces? Maybe you come to someone or pass by ... Stop and think that you feel on this noisy business street. Having passed a bit, you will see a big building, unlike others ... Big sign is reading: "Temple of Silence." You open these doors and find yourself surrounded by full and deep silence. Listen to her, to yourself in this silence. Feel silence and yourself inside it, allow yourself to be soaked in this silence. What is she? What are you? Please as much as you want.

When you want to leave the building, push the door and go out into the street. How do you feel here? What changed? Remember your way to the "Temple of Silence" to be able to return here, when a desire to be visited alone with himself. "

Materials for classes: Paper, colored shallow, pastel, paint. It is possible to use music for relaxation.

The game "I and the other" (game script).

"We want to introduce you and friends with an educational project that can teach to formulate your position and defend it, based on various situations." The idea of \u200b\u200bthe project belongs to Y.D. Türneru and G.V. Vissera - StitchingVredeseducatie employees (Utrecht, Holland). In Holland, this project was implemented at the exhibitions "I see something strange" and "strange is an unusual usual" addressed to Dutch children. In Russia, members of the Dutch colleagues became members of the Group House (Children's outdoor Museum), Similar exhibitions called "I and the Other" were held.

Stroke Game :

Everyone receives cards where they mark their position in relation to heard from the lead. Next, 2 teams of "defenders" and "opponents" of this situation are collected. After discussion, the team draw a sign allowing or prohibiting this situation. After discussing the second concept, the commands are associated again and signs are drawn again. You can use these signs by defining your position.

Text number 1. Prejudice (the text will be distributed to all participants of the game, they read it and enjoy them when discussing).

"Prejudices are peculiar to all people, and is not always bad. There are prejudices that have a positive value. For example, the approval of the "man - family feeder" or "Woman - the Keeper of the Home Field" is essentially prejudices that secure certain norms of people's relationships. Often prejudice play the role of a protective mechanism, especially in situations of collision with something incomprehensible, strange, causing anxiety, for they create a sense of confidence and security before the unknown. But if the prejudices are so good, then you need to part with them? In order to answer this question, you need to figure out the mechanism of their formation.

Prejudice is the first, as a rule, painted by emotion and not supported by the analysis (coming before the reason) the reaction to someone else's, the other. At the same time, our perception of this other is deprived of objectivity, because Choosing some one sign, we build a conclusion based on it in general.

A person with prejudice, as a rule, has a limited idea of \u200b\u200bthe subject of its prejudice. But when he is trying to prove it, he easily finds examples that justify him. So there are superficial generalizations, stereotypes that often lead to conflicts. (Examples of this - those who run in our society about the "persons of the Caucasian nationality" or anecdot about Chukchi.) Negative prejudices are dangerous to those lead to violation of human rights and child rights. They cause those against whom a sense of humiliation and a response, which puts barriers in the relationships of people. That is why it is necessary to part with prejudice. But this is not easy to do. Albert Einstein argued that it was easier to split the atom than to convince someone to part with his prejudices. Prejudice Stubbych because related to emotions. In order to refuse them, you need to proceed from emotions to think about, asking yourself a question about the reason for your own negative reaction. "

Text number 2. Discrimination (the text will be distributed to all participants of the game, they read it and enjoy them when discussing).

"Negative prejudices, accompanied by active actions, are called discrimination, i.e. limit on racial, religious, ideological, property and other signs. Discrimination affects people to the extent that they are different. But a different way of life maybe just as good as our. Children must be proud of the color of their skin, their own history, know their roots, but at the same time be able to appreciate the not similar to themselves. It is very important for its own identification and formation of that positive image, on the basis of which others make up their impression about us. Acquaintance with the culture, customs and lifestyle of other people, the ability to take the position of another helps to explain our prejudices, and therefore eliminate the motives for discrimination. At the same time, the knowledge of the other is not yet a guarantee of the relationship to him. " The presenter asks the players to raise prohibiting or allowing signs and express their attitude to the read. "

Text number 3. The "scapegoat" phenomenon (the text will be distributed to all participants of the game, they read and enjoy them when discussing).

"People who are different from others, easily become" scapegoats ". This image dates back to ancient European legend in which the goat, symbolically loaded by sins and disadvantages of his people, was expelled to the desert. Thanks to this, people got the opportunity to gain internal harmony, but at the same time lost the ability to self-improvement. Options for the manifestation of this phenomenon are numerous. If the society feces unemployment, if the football team loses, and a tense atmosphere reigns in the classroom, there is always a "scapegoat". The mechanism of action of the phenomenon "goat of the scape" is a triangle. Here, there must be a fillingler - the leader, then a support group and, finally, the "goat of the scapeman". The instigator needs a group that supports it, and that, in turn, does not take anything in defense offended because of the fear of becoming the target. "

"In China, it is considered indecent to kiss another when meeting, and we have kisses are the usual manifestation of sympathy. In China, they do not drink cold water, and we have thirst for thirst in the heat. In China, the main dishes are submitted at the beginning, and then it follows the soup, and our soup is considered the first dish. In China, the peel with vegetables and fruits believes the blade of a knife directed from themselves, and we have to themselves. "

Spend a kind of game. Let those who believe that the behavior of the Chinese is strange, will raise right hand, And those who think that it is usually, left. The response of the participants will give the basis to talk about what is not "bad" and "good", "natural" and "unnatural" customs. Every people have the right to their own.

Discuss also with friends, what role is in some peoples of Australia, Africa, South America, painting of the face, tattoo and puncture, as well as how these elements are used in the modern youth environment. Pay attention to the fact that in the same case painting, piercing, tattoo are signs of belonging to a specific social group, a signal about the intentions of a person. Finally, they demonstrate the presentation of people about beauty. In other words, these elements have the same function in different cultures.

The game ends when the topic of conversation is exhausted.

Conclusion

The formation of culture of tolerance is of particular relevance in the light of the globalization currently. Under its impact, the world is becoming more complete.

Various cultures, religions, civilization interacted before. At the same time, an acute female has often arose, and intolerance. However, their main foci were separated by geographically, being fell apart from each other. Now global communication, financial, migration flows struck huge bars in existing barriers, recounting different cultures and lifestyles in the unified space of world society. There is a dense, all-permissive network of public relations. Intolerance under these conditions generates high voltages capable of blocking the vital activity of social systems both at the national and world levels.

At the same time, globalization clearly demonstrates an inexhaustible manifold of sociocultural traditions and forms of a social device, the norms of relationships and value orientations inherent in different communities. With each decade, this variety is not only not reduced, but it grows, sometimes in geometric progression, challenging the ability of the human race itself to regulate contradictions arising in this soil, prevent their outrage into acute conflicts and collisions.

The society is interested in his members, especially the youth, formed an open thinking, awakened interest in the dialogue of followers of different worldviews and political preferences for the elimination of prejudice against each other on the basis of tolerance and constructive cooperation in the name of the universal benefit. At the same time, the Company stands for tough suppression of any extremist actions, for the inevitability of the punishment of their inspirations and participants.

The widespread and complete approval of the atmosphere of tolerance and at the same time active rejection of the manifestations of extremism is a long process. Here much depends not only from government agencies and public, including the youth, organizations, but also from the education system and education, from the media, cultural figures, from overcoming their indifferent attitude to the existing - far from tolerance - positions and the businesses, to the recurrences of extremism. Significance and culture of political figures, the leaders of public, especially the youth, movements of modern Russia are also able to provide significant impact.

List of used literature

1. Big Encyclopedic Dictionary. In 2 tons / ch. ed. A.M. Prokhorov. - owls. Encyclopedia, 1991.-T.2.

2. Valitova R.R. Tolerance: vice or virtue? // Bulletin of Moscow University. Ser.7. Philosophy, 1996.

3. Weber A.B. Global Measurement Tolerance // Report on the Symposium "Public Sphere and Culture of Tolerance: Common Problems and Russian Specificity" April 9, 2002 M., 2002.

4. Ventcel K.N. The ideal school of the future and ways of its implementation // Reader on the history of school and pedagogy of Russia. - M., 1974.

5. Vygotsky L.S. Pedagogical psychology. - M., 1991.

6. Galkin A.A. Public sphere and culture of tolerance. - M., 2002.

7. Civil and political rights. Incompatibility of democracy and racism // Report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Economic and Social Council of the UN. February 7, 2002. P. 20-21.

8. Dal V. Dictionary Live Great Russian language. M.: State Publishing House of Foreign and National Dictionary, 1955.

9. Druzhinin V.N. Life options. Essays of existential psychology. M.; St. Petersburg., 2000.

10. Zimbuli A.E. Why tolerance and what tolerance? // Bulletin SPbSU. 1996. №3. P. 23-27.

11. Zolotukhin V.M. Tolerance as universal value // Modern problems of humanitarian disciplines. Part 1. M., 1997. P. 7-9.

13. Iranian diary. B. m., B. G.-S. 18-37.

14. Ishchenko Yu.A. Tolerance as a philosophical and ideological problem // Philosophical and sociological thought. 1990. №4. P. 48-60.

15. Carlgen F. Education to Freedom / Per. With Nem.m., 1992.

16. Kleptsova E.Yu. Psychology and pedagogy of tolerance: Tutorial. - M.: Academic Project, 2004.

17. Kozyreva P.M., Gerasimova S.B., Kiseleva I.P., Nizamova A.M. The evolution of social well-being Russians and features of socio-economic adaptation (1994-2004) // Russia reformed. M., 2002. P. 160-183.

18. Kondakov A.M. Formation of plants of tolerant consciousness // Culture of the world and non-violence in student education: the experience of Russia regions. M.: Development Center for Extras. Education of children, 1999. P. 95-97.

19. Brief philosophical encyclopedia. M., Progress - Encyclopedia, 1994.

20. Lecturer V.A. On the tolerance of pluralism and criticism // Questions of philosophy, №11,1997.

21. Lviv M.V. Dictionary of Antonyms Rus. Language: more than 200 antonym. par / ed. L.A. Novikova. - M.: Rus. Yaz., 1988.

22. Montessori M. Method scientific. Pedagogy, applied to children's education in the houses of the child // History Doszhk. Cabin. Pedagogy: Reader. M., 1974.

23. Intolerance in Russia. / Ed. Vitkovskaya, A. Malashenko. M.: Mosk. Center Carnegie, 1999.

24. Novichkov VB Metropolitan megalopolis as a polyethnic and polycultural environment // Pedagogy. No. 4.1997.

25. Ohzhs. S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language. - M., 1983.-s. 707.

26. ONDRACHEK P. Principles of effective education. Vologda, 2001.

27. Petritsky V.A. Tolerance - universal ethical principle // News of the SP Forestry Academy. St. Petersburg; 1993.-C.139-151.

28. Human rights, tolerance, culture of the world // Dock. M., 2002.

29. Psychology of National Intolerance: Reader / Sost. Yu.V. Chernyavskaya. MN: Harvest, 1998.

30. Religion and law. Legal fundamentals of freedom of conscience and activities of religious associations in the CIS and Baltic countries: a meeting of legal acts. M.: Jurisprudence, 2002. P. 7-56, 57-203.

31. Rierdon B. Tolerance - the road to the world. M., 2001.

32. Rogers K., Freiberg D. Freedom to study. M., 2002.

33. Russia: 10 years of reforms. M., 2002. P. 94.

34. Skvortsov L.V. Tolerance: illusion or rescue means? // October.№3.1997.

35. Dictionary foreign words: OK. 20,000 words. - SPb.: Duet, 1994.

36. Dictionary on ethics / ed. A.A.Guseynova and I.S. Kona. M.-.: Politicization, 1989.

37. Dictionary Russian. Language: in 4 tons / Academy of Sciences of the USSR, the Institute of the Russian Language; Ed. A.P. Eugeneva. M.: Rus. Yaz., 1981.

38. Sukhomlinsky V.A.Muda, the power of the collective // \u200b\u200bEvim. Ped. cit. TZ M., 1981.

39. Sukhomlinsky V.A. Conversation with a young school principal // Evim. Ped. cit. TZ M., 1981.

40. Sukhomlinsky V.A. Pavlyshevskaya cf. School // Comm. Ped. cit. T.2.m., 1981.

41. Soldatova G.U. Inter-ethnic tension. M.: Meaning, 1998.

42. Tolerance. Society. Ed. MP Mchidova. - M.: Publishing House "Republic", 2004.

43. Tolerance: Mr. region. Scientific practice. conf. Yakutsk. YANTSO RAS, 1994.

44. Tolerance: Collection of Scientific. Articles. Vol. 1. Kemerovo: Kuzbassvuzdat., 1995.

45. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. In 4 tons / comp. V.V. Vinogradov, G.O. Vinokur and others; Ed. D.N. Ushakov. - M.: Russian Dictionaries, 1994.

46. \u200b\u200bTolstoy L.N. To combine the love of business and to students // Teacher: Articles. Doc.-M., 1991.

47. Establishment of the culture of the world: universal values \u200b\u200band civil society. Tver, 2001. p.66.

48. Wayne K. Education and tolerance // Higher education In Europe. # 2.-1997.

49. Formation of plants of the tolerant consciousness and prevention of various types of extremism in Russian society for 2001-2005. Fed. targets. Prog. M.: MSHP, 2002

50. Frolov S.S. Sociology: Tutorial for higher educational institutions. M.: Logos, 1997.

51. Heffa O. Pluralism and tolerance: to legitimacy in the modern world // Philosophical sciences. №12.1991.

52. Shemyakina O. Emotional obstacles in mutual understanding of cultural communities // Public sciences and modernity. - 1994.-№4.

53. WORLDCONFERENCEAGAINSTRACISM // World Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related intolerance. Durban (South Africa). August 31 - September 7, 2001.-s. 17-18.

Attachment 1

Types of tolerance

Types of public consciousness	Types of tolerance	Signs of tolerance
Mythological	"Hidden" tolerance	"Tolerance is not yet comprehended conceptually. Society tolerant refers to the specifics of philosophical thinking, since it does not lead to the destruction of the images of mythical consciousness, but ultimately there is a tendency to suppress philosophy ... " "In the structure of absolute faith, monotheism, tolerance is impossible in principle, since it destroys absoluteness, but religious wars, the basis of which was religious intolerance, ultimately, and prepared the legitization of tolerance ..."
Secular	"Cultural" tolerance	"In a secular society, tolerance becomes a reality as a result of recognition as true universal moral principles. On a given basis, respect for other, the adoption of ethnic and national characteristics, the collapse in social views, which are generated by the peculiarities of living conditions, professional activities, cultural traditions. Tolerance here is a consequence of high spiritual and moral culture ... "
Scientific public	Tolerance in the field of scientific mentality	"Tolerance to other people's opinions in the field of science is important only where the question has not yet been identified completely; Theoretical truth built on irrefutable evidence requires recognition. In cases where the arguments of ProTContra Tolerance may be presented in a certain question takes place when assessing opponent's arguments. "

Appendix 2.

Models of tolerance

Models of tolerance	Features of models of tolerance
Tolerance as indifference	"Tolerance with such an understanding acts as essentially indifference to the existence of various views and practices, since the latter are considered as an unimportant in the face of the main problems with which society has a business."
Tolerance as the impossibility of mutual understanding	"According to this understanding of the tolerance, religious, metaphysical views, the specific values \u200b\u200bof one or another culture are not something minor for human activity and for the development of society. Tolerance in this case acts as respect for another, whom I cannot understand and with which I can not interact "
Tolerance as condescension	"In the event of this understanding, tolerance acts as conducive to the weakness of others, combined with some fraction of contempt for them. For example, I have to endure views, the failure of which I understand and can show, but it makes sense to enter a critical discussion with such a person. "
Tolerance as an expanding of your own experience and critical dialogue	"Tolerance in this case acts as respect for someone else's position in combination with the installation on a mutual change in positions as a result of a critical dialogue"

Appendix 3.

2001 survey data regarding a number of household situations where ethno-confessional factors are present.

Appendix 4.

A questionnaire form for the exercise "The features of the tolerant personality"

Last Edited by 8 Years, 9 Monhs Ago

81. The problem of tolerance in modern society. The value of tolerance in the modern world.

Plan

1. Concept (definition and history of formation)

2. Approaches (axiological, ideal-typical, ontola-historical, conflict) (may not be told)

3. The meaning of tolerance (for society as a whole and in the field of policies)

4. The problem of tolerance (the current situation that makes it up to date; paradoxes of tolerance)

1. Concept

A. Definition

Tolerance (from Lat. Tolerantia - tolerance) - the quality characterizing the attitude towards another person as a relativeness of the rejection, caused by all the fact that it marks other (appearance, a speech manner, tastes, lifestyle, beliefs and etc.). T. implies the mood to understand and dialogue with the other, recognition and respect for his rights unlike. (R.R. Valitova, new philosophical encyclopedia)

"T. - this is a recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of man, who, despite all the differences, should be the same for everyone"(L.M. Romanenko)

T. calls "the strange value of abstinence from the use of its strength to the detriment of a fundamentally unacceptable deflection" (M.B. Khomyakov),

B. History of the term

Initially, the word Tolerantia meant passive patience, voluntary transfer of suffering. But in the 16th century it was understood as "permission", "restraint". Special distribution has acquired at the end of the 20th century due to the problems of the interaction of various cultures, multiculturalism, etc.

2. Approaches

In total, in the scientific literature, we can distinguish four methodological approaches to tolerance: 1) axiological; 2) the ideal-typical, whose supporters (for example, John Rolz and other representatives of deontological liberalism) see a certain moral ideal in tolerance, to the achievement of which society needs to strive; 3) ONTOLO-historicalist, considering tolerance as a certain way of coexistence groups in history; As well as 4) "Conflict" research approach, which in domestic science is developed in detail by Boris Kapustin, and in the West, Chantal Muffe and Slava Zhizhek, Ernesto Laklau. Most often, this category is viewed as value-in-ourselves or as one of the historical types of political practices.

1) Axiological approach Trucks tolerance as "Value-in-Own" (for Markouze - "purpose-in-one", for Peter P. Nicholson - "good-in-one") or, at least, as one of the values \u200b\u200bof liberal democracy .

Herbert Marcuse in the 60s of the last century drew attention to the fact that in the modern liberal society, the subjects of politics disappear. Previously, tolerance served as defense of liberation forces. The political struggle was then replaced by political technologies. Society claims that it is tolerant, but since it does not have real opponents, tolerance turns into apologetics status quo and an ideology of suppression, because Genuine political entities are outside the borders of pervolored, outside of tolerance. Practiced overall tolerance - apparent. And if atheists, magomethane and papists and papists were located during the time of Locke outside of the tolerance, then during the time of Marcuse - unemployed, disabled and so on. Social outsiders, representatives of racial, ethnic, sexual and other minorities.

The moral theorists of tolerance to resolve the above paradox in the process of argument, as a rule, imperceptibly replace this category by any other, close in meaning, but still not absolutely identical concept. Under tolerance, they understand, for example, respect for a person's personality or a variety of cultures.

2) based on ideal-typical the approach lies taking its origin from Cant regulatory and rational look at tolerance based on the concept of natural inalienable individual rights. Kant leaves the problem of the moral generality of individuals due to the fact that the laws of morality formulated by them and, above all, the categorical imperative, operate in a universal world. However, communication of people is that, according to Kant, is " the greatest goal Human purpose "is" the relationship of special to special, not reduced to abstract universality. "

3) ONTOLO-HISCOUNT Michael Walzer uses in his study dedicated to five tolerance regimes, sometimes other communitarists and multiculturalists are resorted to it, as well as all those authors that appeal to non-liberal tolerance grounds. Its value is diminished by the fact that, by and large, his adherents are reduced by the theory of tolerance before the description of historical examples of tolerant modes.

Michael Walzer, realizing that tolerance is easiest to practice in the conditions of "clearly designated and generally accepted relations of domination and subordination," yet urges to strive for "mutual respect". It emphasizes the need for tolerance, "mixed at some curiosity combination and enthusiasm." From the point of view of Walzer, the measures of positive discrimination are fully justified: "It is not yet broken by the relationship between class and group affiliation, no respect for some respect or tolerance of speech here." Although he recognizes that such measures, as a rule, only enhance intolerance, especially at the initial stage.

4) for conflict topic Tolerance is not the abolition of the "struggle", not the opposite of it, and nothing else like a struggle, but in certain boundaries, which cannot be determined by a priori, as they are asking for the practice of struggle.

Boris Kapustin proposes not to discard the radical idea of \u200b\u200bversatility as such, closing in the horizon of the existing "here and now" of the private "we", but to put in the place of transcendental and metatistoric versatility, "real historical versatility", to distancing in relation to the cultural tradition, because without Distance (in Yu. Habermas) is generally impossible any reflection.

Therefore, Boris Kapustin (Following I. Berlin), unlike John Gray, consistently defends the point of view that "tolerance and indifference - not just different, but mutually exclusive concepts", because in their developed forms, tolerance implies "not passive indifference, but The active mutual appeal of opponents is as opponents, each of which is committed not only to its own values, distinguishing it from others, but also common to all the values \u200b\u200bof freedom. " In his opinion, a tolerant entity, defending its values, considering them "true", and the beliefs of another - delusions, assesses their truth below the freedom of another to carry out their choice, and recognizes that the values \u200b\u200bare so diverse that they cannot be perfectly agreed upon each with a friend.

3. The value of tolerance

A. The value of tolerance for society(R.R. Valitova, new philosophical encyclopedia)

The necessary condition for the general unity of people of various beliefs, cultural traditions, political. belief

Key principle of civil society

B. The value of tolerance in politics (I.G. Usachev, Political Encyclopedia, 1994)

The condition of ordered relations both within the state and between the state

The condition for establishing the effective contacts between societies. Organizations, parties and states

Special value manifestation of exposure, the ability to be tolerant is played with political. Negotiations (ability to listen to the opinion opposite. Parties, think about it)

T. It is necessary when searching is political. Allies

4. The problem of tolerance

A. Modern situation that makes the problem of tolerance relevant

Can be told about the processes of globalization, which led to

a) Even Western European societies, who were previously mono-ethnic, becomes political ethnic. Representatives of different ethnic groups and denominations are forced to live together.

b) Contacts between even remote countries were abruptly intensified both private and political. Level

c) in multipolarity conditions it is impossible to completely ignore the interests of other religions and countries.

(from Ilinskaya :)

The modern crisis of capitalism is also explained by the loss of those traditional moral attitudes that initially spawned this phenomenon.
Another feature of post-modernity is the "fluidity" of its social fabric. Even in the industrial society, each individual filled in a strictly defined place, occupied a certain fixed position as part of a more or less stable environment, demarcation lines between organizations and their substructures were toughly defined in space. In conditions of post-Russian, according to Seyl Benhabib, most of us are members of more than one community, more than one language (and even ethnic) group.
In the context of compression of space and time in which individuals have to act now, they arbitrarily choose the moral coordinate system, actualizing one of its identities at one time or another.

B. Paradoxes of tolerance

The essence of paradoxes: a) can and you need to be tolerant to those views and traditions, which themselves exclude tolerance, b) whether tolerance does not lead to the crisis of the moral basis of culture

(Examples from Ilinskaya)

but)In this series, you can also mention the practice of applying ritual injections, other forms of membership, excessive cruelty and torturing children in the process of home education in adherents of some sects, i.e. Such cultural manifestations that are incompatible with the basic values \u200b\u200bof liberal democracy. Despite the oral condemnation and criminal punishability of this kind of home practices, society, as a rule, "does not notice" of domestic violence. In France, for example, according to Michael Walzer, inside the immigrant African communities, the publicly condemned ritual uglision of the genital organs with newborn girls flourishes in the immigrant African communities. Also, "quite tolerant" is home torturing its own and adopted children among members of a number of religious sects in the United States. The public periodically learns about what is "for a high fence of privacy", when children die or get cruel injury, and their identity is irreparably injured. The reason for such a tolerance, as we believe, is simple: children do not represent groups that fights for their interests. In addition, according to the liberal tradition, children (in contrast to women) have not yet reached "moral maturity" and are not capable of autonomy or self-defordant.
b)A paradoxical situation arises when a part of the community representatives are forced to live on the standards that they do not recognize as "their own." Another, "modern" part of the community, gradually loses its moral benchmarks, since modern morality is possible only until it is powered by non-reflectible settings, borrowed from the morality of traditional for this community. Such an approval is easiest to illustrate the example of the Institute of Family (a serious crisis experienced today), since it is the family values \u200b\u200bof the centuries who were perceived as moral, the family was the most important institution of socialization in traditional society etc. Sobolay love, from the point of view of traditional consciousness, was immoral, since he undermined the viability of society, in which public reproduction was the main task of the family. Today, thanks to the possibility of artificial fertilization, "growing children in a test tube", surrogate motherhood and so on., Same-sex couple may well have children. But the family is currently the primary socialization institution. The child brought up by same-sex parents will obviously have other standards of marriage behavior than the one was born and brought up by a heterosexual couple.

B. Position Ilyinskaya (here is Ilinskaya, and better, probably make a personal opinion)

We join the conservative point of view of John Gray regarding the advantages of tolerance in view of the fact that it, in contrast to the rational projects on the reorganization of the world, does not struggle with delusions. Tolerance as a virtue peculiar to people who aware of their imperfection is far from the requirements for the consolidation of some preferences with the help of special rights or privileges, as well as attempts to instill a certain lifestyle. She just allows together with each other to those people who can temper their demands and patiently demolish the differences. The policy of post-hour tolerance is not the policy of realization of imaginary rights, but the practice of mutual concessions and compromises in the process of achieving agreements suitable for today, and not at all times. However, tolerance is possible only where there is at least a minimum public consensus on public morality issues, the unity of the goal in the Company's affairs, which is quite possible without unity of convictions: a tolerant entity, defending its values, considering them "true", and the beliefs of another - delusions It should be aware that the values \u200b\u200bare so diverse that they cannot be perfectly agreed with each other, and evaluate their truth below the freedom of another to independently exercise their choice.
Today it is tolerant - one of the requirements of the public morality of "civilized" humanity. An educated and educated individual demonstrate the manifestations of intolerance is simply indecent. But the idyllic picture of tolerance is disturbed when the tolerant entity faces a "true" moral subject, with its traditionally closed, holistic and therefore intolerable moralme conscious ...