Paradoxes of Religious Toleration in Early Modern Political Thought

Paradoxes of Religious Toleration in Early Modern Political Thought In today s developed world much of what people believe about religious toleration has evolved from crucial innovations in toleration theory developed in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Think

  • Title: Paradoxes of Religious Toleration in Early Modern Political Thought
  • Author: John Christian Laursen María José Villaverde
  • ISBN: 9781280880391
  • Page: 210
  • Format: ebook
  • In today s developed world, much of what people believe about religious toleration has evolved from crucial innovations in toleration theory developed in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Thinkers from that period have been rightly celebrated for creating influential, liberating concepts and ideas that have enabled many of us to live in peace However, their work wIn today s developed world, much of what people believe about religious toleration has evolved from crucial innovations in toleration theory developed in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Thinkers from that period have been rightly celebrated for creating influential, liberating concepts and ideas that have enabled many of us to live in peace However, their work was certainly not perfect In this enlightening volume, John Christian Laursen and Maria Jose Villaverde have gathered contributors to focus on the paradoxes, blindspots, unexpected flaws, or ambiguities in early modern toleration theories and practices Each chapter explores the complexities, complications, and inconsistencies that came up in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as people grappled with the idea of toleration In understanding the weaknesses, contradictions, and ambivalences in other theories, they hope to provoke thought about the defects in ways of thinking about toleration in order to help in overcoming similar problems in contemporary toleration theories.

    One thought on “Paradoxes of Religious Toleration in Early Modern Political Thought”

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *