On the one hand, there are increases in the sense of personal self-awareness, of cultural uniqueness and hence of diversity. On the other hand, there is expanded interchange between peoples and civilizations. Tolerance as a philosophical imperative has two related meanings for interaction between human beings. On the one hand, a negative tolerance allows people to live their own lives and to share in the common welfare. But this may not be enough because it is passive and associated with social atomism, individual independence and isolation.
History often shows how passive tolerance can slide into conflict and chaos.
On the other hand, a positive and active tolerance raises a number of tasks. First, the supposition that civilizational paradigms are simply incommensurable and by implication conflictive must be critically reevaluated. Second, it is necessary to look not only for a passive or negative tolerance, but for active bonds of shared and mutual concerns, building upon the need to face concrete common challenges. Third, philosophical and religious bases for positive mutuality must be sought. Fourth, whole new and especially aesthetic dimensions of human consciousness appear needed in order to handle the combination of newly heightened sense of diversity with the expanding, even global, interchange.