Tolerantie en liberale democratie. Onopgemerkte aannames en historische onjuistheden in liberale debatten over tolerantie aan het einde van de twintigste eeuw.

This dissertation explores the concept of toleration as both an attitude and a virtue within the context of late twentieth-century liberal debates. Specifically, it examines the influential theory of toleration developed by Nicholson, Mendus, Warnock, Heyd, Fletcher, Horton, Scanlon, and Williams, highlighting some of its unnoticed assumptions and historical inaccuracies. Methodologically, it combines conceptual analysis, historical critique, and philosophical reflection on seminal thinkers such as Spinoza and Locke. This dissertation argues that, despite its influence, the conception of toleration developed by Nicholson et al. is less clear than these authors believed. For instance, while the theory effectively demonstrated how toleration aligns with liberal democracy and multiculturalism, it failed to clearly establish why it should be regarded as a virtue. Consequently, the dissertation advocates for approaching the topic of toleration from a new perspective, specifically through the lens of classical virtue ethics. It argues that toleration should be seen as the virtue Aristotle described as "being even-tempered," and which is often referred to in biblical contexts as 'meekness' or 'gentleness.' This reframing highlights toleration as a virtue rooted in self-control and the mitigation of anger, rather than in its compatibility with liberal democratic values or its distinction from indifference. Keywords: Toleration in Political Philosophy, Liberal Democratic Theory, Multiculturalism and Pluralism, Moral and Political Virtues, Philosophical Critique of Toleration