Quotes About Pluralism

I don't want to define New York Red Bull as one player, or one manager.

I refer to myself as 'we.'

What America is, to me, is a guy doesn't want to buy, you let him not buy, you respect his not buying. A guy has a crazy notion different from your crazy notion, you pat him on the back and say, Hey pal, nice crazy notion, let's go have a beer. America, to me, should be shouting all the time, a bunch of shouting voices, most of them wrong, some of them nuts, but please, not just one droning glamorous reasonable voice.

No one religion is right for everyone, and no religion—whether it be Wicca, Buddhism, Judaism, Catholicism—is more valid than any other. Religious diversity is something that needs not only to be tolerated, but also celebrated. The good that religion was designed to teach and maintain inevitably turns to harm when one religious group claims superiority over another or tries to deny others of their constitutional right to believe in and worship the god or goddess of their choice.

I'm all in favour of talking to other parties, always have been, always will be. I'm a pluralist, talk to them, see what we've got in common, work together, fine.

When we teach in pluralistic ways, there are two wonderful dividends. First of all, we reach more students, because some learn best through stories, some through works of art, some through role play etc. Second of all, we show what it is like really to understand something.

Democracies domesticate religious groups to become political players. That's how it works.

I travel the world, and I'm happy to say that America is still the great melting pot - maybe a chunky stew rather than a melting pot at this point, but you know what I mean.

The idea of the beauty of diversity came from just growing up where I grew up. Los Angeles is a very big city - there's Little Ethiopia, Little Armenia, Little Tokyo, Chinatown, there's African-Americans, Latinos, Europeans.

Tolerance, diversity, and inclusion are not political opinions. They are non-negotiable human rights - hard fought and secured in America.

I believe in an India of pluralism and diversity, not of religious bigotry and caste politics. I believe in an India that is secure in itself and confident of its place in the world, an India that is a proud example of tolerance, freedom and hope for the downtrodden.

Broad tolerance in the matter of beliefs is necessarily a part of the new ethics.

Religious-liberty protections are one way of achieving civil peace even amid disagreement. The United States is a pluralistic society. To protect that pluralism and the rights of all Americans, of whatever faith they may practice, religious-liberty laws are good policy. Liberals committed to tolerance should embrace them.

The fabric of our Constitution and our civilisational culture is based on tolerance.

The self-proclaimed Islamic State cannot tolerate diversity, which is why we must celebrate it.

To rely on a single model is hubris.

I cannot picture to myself a time when all mankind will have one religion.

Unity has never meant uniformity.

Shweder's writings were my red pill. I began to see that many moral matrices coexist within each nation. Each matrix provides a complete, unified, and emotionally compelling worldview, easily justified by observable evidence and nearly impregnable to attack by arguments from outsiders.

moral monism—the attempt to ground all of morality on a single principle—leads to societies that are unsatisfying to most people and at high risk of becoming inhumane because they ignore so many other moral principles

Cuídate de cualquiera que insista en que existe una verdadera moralidad para todas las personas, tiempos y lugares, especialmente si esa moralidad se basa en un solo fundamento moral.

As Western societies became more educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic, the minds of its intellectuals changed. They became more analytic and less holistic.26 Utilitarianism and deontology became far more appealing to ethicists than Hume's messy, pluralist, sentimentalist approach.

universities need to make defending pluralism a top institutional priority, not an afterthought. If they do not, politicians—the world's worst judges of scientific integrity—will try to do it for them.

the enemies of intellectual pluralism and free inquiry seem to be ten feet tall. Which is just how they want to seem.