Tolerance, My English Reader, Class VIII, DAV Board, The Best Solutions- A

Section – A

A.1. Summary in English – On Tolerance

E.M. Forster’s essay “On Tolerance” highlights the importance of tolerance in a world full of diversity and conflict. Written during World War II, Forster reflects on how, in a densely populated and interconnected world, it is impossible to love everyone, but we must learn to tolerate others. He contrasts intolerance, which leads to violence and hatred, with tolerance, which promotes peaceful coexistence.

Forster believes that after war, reconstruction won’t be easy or quick, so tolerance will be essential—not as a divine principle, but as common sense. Tolerance helps us live together when love and sympathy are no longer possible. It is needed in daily life, in public spaces, between races, nations, and social classes. It requires imagination and understanding, and though it may seem like a weak virtue, it is a practical and necessary one for building a better future.

हिंदी में सारांश

“On Tolerance” निबंध में ई.एम. फॉर्स्टर सहनशीलता के महत्त्व को बताते हैं। यह निबंध द्वितीय विश्व युद्ध के समय लिखा गया था, जब दुनिया संघर्ष और घृणा से भरी हुई थी। लेखक कहते हैं कि हम सब एक ही दुनिया में रहते हैं जहाँ सभी को पसंद करना या प्रेम करना संभव नहीं, परंतु सहना और सहनशील बनना आवश्यक है।

फॉर्स्टर मानते हैं कि युद्ध के बाद दुनिया का पुनर्निर्माण आसान नहीं होगा। इसलिए, सहनशीलता ज़रूरी है – यह कोई दैवी गुण नहीं, बल्कि सामान्य समझदारी है। जब प्रेम खत्म हो जाता है, तब सहनशीलता ही हमें एक साथ रहने में मदद करती है। यह हमें सड़कों, दफ्तरों, फैक्टरियों और देशों के बीच भी चाहिए होती है। सहनशीलता कमजोरी नहीं, बल्कि एक व्यावहारिक और उपयोगी गुण है जो दूसरों की स्थिति समझने की कल्पना की माँग करता है।

Word Meanings Table (English–Hindi Vocabulary)

Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)

1. Why does Forster believe tolerance is important?
   a) Because it is a divine value
   b) Because it is thrilling
   c) Because it is common sense and needed in an overcrowded world ✅
   d) Because it replaces democracy
2. According to Forster, what happens when love gives out?
   a) Hatred takes over
   b) Tolerance takes over ✅
   c) People become aggressive
   d) The world ends
3. What does Forster say about military ideals?
   a) They are still useful
   b) They inspire courage
   c) They are dangerous and outdated ✅
   d) They ensure peace
4. What quality does tolerance require?
   a) Wealth
   b) Intelligence
   c) Imagination ✅
   d) Anger
5. Where is tolerance most needed according to the essay?
   a) Only in homes
   b) Only among soldiers
   c) Between classes, races, and nations ✅
   d) Nowhere, it’s outdated

Short Questions and Answers

1. Q: What is the central idea of Forster’s essay “On Tolerance”?
   A: The central idea is that tolerance is essential for peaceful living, especially in a crowded and diverse world, and it should be practiced when love or sympathy is not possible.
2. Q: How does Forster define tolerance?
   A: He defines it as putting up with people you don’t like, not as a lofty principle, but as a practical and necessary attitude in life.
3. Q: Why does the writer not fully believe in love for everyone?
   A: Because love is difficult to maintain for strangers or people we dislike, but tolerance is more realistic and achievable.
4. Q: According to the author, what is the danger of military ideals?
   A: Military ideals lead to violence, injuries, and death, and are unsuitable in today’s densely populated world.
5. Q: How is tolerance different from weakness?
   A: Tolerance is not giving in or being weak; it requires strength, imagination, and patience.

A.2 On the basis of your reading of the passage, complete the following statements.

(a) According to the author, the two ways of dealing with people one doesn’t like are:
(i) Kill them, banish them, segregate them, and then proclaim yourself superior.
(ii) Put up with them (tolerate them) as best as one can.

(b) The author prefers the second of the above two ways because it is the way of democracies and it helps build a civilised future.

(c) According to the author, the most essential human trait for building a civilised world is tolerance because we have to live together in an overcrowded and interconnected world.

(d) The author does not believe in military action and ideals because:
(i) They result in thousands of people being maimed, killed, or imprisoned.
(ii) In today’s world, nations and cities are too closely connected for such actions to be justified.

(e) The author feels that tolerance is probably a more desirable virtue than love because love gives out when we move among strangers, but tolerance can still function and keep society going.

(f) The author calls tolerance “a desirable spiritual exercise” because it requires us to constantly imagine ourselves in others’ place, which builds empathy and understanding.

A.3. Complete the web chart given below by filling in the blurbs with the negative traits and characteristics that will have to be avoided for a better and a civilised world.

• avoid being huffy
• avoid being touchy
• avoid being irritable
• avoid being revengeful
• avoid being intolerant
• avoid being arrogant
• avoid being prejudiced
• avoid being aggressive or violent

These are the qualities that prevent peaceful coexistence and must be avoided to help foster tolerance, understanding, and harmony in a civilised society.

A.4. Read the extracts from ‘On Tolerance’ given below and tick (✔) the option that explains the extract best.

(a) … they are tumbling over each other.:

people are falling over each other.

people contradict/oppose each other’s ideals and points of view.

people push each other deliberately.

Answer – people contradict/oppose each other’s ideals and points of view.

(b) By ‘one nation is mixed up with another, one city cannot be separated from its neighbour, the author means:

nations and people are very friendly, so they cannot be separated.

national and international boundaries are not clearly defined, so nations and people cannot be separated.

people of all castes and creeds live together, so they cannot be separated.

Answer – people of all castes and creeds live together, so they cannot be separated.

(c) …you are the salt of the earth.’:

you are loyal to the land.

you eat the salt extracted from the earth.

you are a very good and honest person.

Answer – you are a very good and honest person.

(d) By the phrase ‘overcrowded and overheated planet, the author means:

the world is overpopulated and so the temperature has risen.

the world has people of all castes and creeds and so is more prone to arguments and fights.

global warming has affected the climate of the overpopulated countries.

Answer – the world has people of all castes and creeds and so is more prone to arguments and fights.

A.5. HOTS

(a) The author says, “Tolerance is not the same as weakness. Putting up with people doesn’t mean giving in to them. Discuss with your friends and find out the difference between ‘tolerance’ and ‘weakness’

Conclusion:
Tolerance is a strength of character, requiring effort and empathy. Weakness, on the other hand, is the inability to respond effectively to a situation.

(b) Given below are a few situations. Find out which of these suggest tolerance and which of these imply weakness.

Conclusion:
Only Situation 4 reflects tolerance — the ability to bear discomfort without reacting negatively. The others reflect weakness, where action should have been taken but wasn’t.

A.6. Work with your partner and complete the table given below by filling in the questions raised in the essay ‘On Tolerance’ and the suggested solutions. s

A.7. Values

Newspapers are replete with reports of horrendous terrorist attacks. Such attacks hinder human progress and are a serious threat to human existence. According to E.M. Forster, tolerance is the only virtue which can save mankind. Do you agree? Justify your stand.

Justification: Why Tolerance Can Save Mankind

1. Terrorism thrives on hatred and division:
   Terrorist attacks often target specific communities or beliefs, aiming to create fear and divide people. Tolerance helps people see beyond differences, reject extremism, and stand united.
2. Globalisation demands peaceful coexistence:
   We live in a world where people of different religions, races, and ideologies live side by side. Without tolerance, conflict is inevitable. With tolerance, we can learn, grow, and coexist.
3. Violence cannot build, only tolerance can:
   Hatred destroys lives, families, and nations. Tolerance, as Forster says, may not be exciting, but it is practical and essential for creating a peaceful and civilised society.
4. Tolerance leads to understanding and empathy:
   When we try to understand others’ perspectives, we realise that differences are natural and not reasons for hatred. This understanding fosters peace and compassion.
5. Prevents cycles of revenge and war:
   Without tolerance, violence leads to more violence. Tolerance breaks this cycle and allows for reconciliation and healing.

Conclusion:

Tolerance is not weakness; it is strength. It is not passive; it is active self-control and wisdom. As Forster said, if love fails, tolerance must step in — because without it, survival itself becomes difficult in a world full of diversity and conflict.

A.8. Group Discussion

The essay ‘On Tolerance’ was written during World War II. You might be familiar with the reasons behind the War. Discuss these reasons in the class. Could the War have been avoided if the nations were more ‘tolerant’?

For the Teacher

Divide the class into two groups.

Encourage the students to present their arguments clearly and concisely.

Ensure maximum participation.

Group Discussion Topic:

Could World War II have been avoided if nations were more tolerant?

Instructions for the Teacher:

• Divide the class into two groups:

Group A – Argues that the war could have been avoided through tolerance

Group B – Argues that the war was inevitable and not just due to lack of tolerance

• Encourage each student to speak for 1–2 minutes.
• Remind them to be respectful and concise.
• Conclude with a short reflection from both sides.

Group A: YES, the war could have been avoided

Points to Consider:

1. Racial and Religious Intolerance:
   Nazi Germany’s hatred toward Jews and minorities stemmed from extreme intolerance. Had there been more acceptance and inclusion, the genocide and conflict might not have occurred.
2. Intolerance of Differences in Ideologies:
   Nations failed to understand and respect different political ideologies, like communism vs fascism, which escalated tensions.
3. Lack of Diplomacy:
   Aggressive nationalism and refusal to negotiate peacefully led to war. More tolerant diplomacy could have fostered understanding.
4. Intolerance in Expansionist Policies:
   Countries like Germany and Japan were intolerant of others’ sovereignty. A tolerant approach could have prevented invasion and conflict.

Group B: NO, the war was inevitable

Points to Consider:

1. Economic Depression:
   The Great Depression caused extreme poverty, leading to the rise of fascist leaders who promised power. Tolerance alone couldn’t have solved economic crises.
2. Treaty of Versailles:
   The harsh conditions placed on Germany after World War I caused resentment and a desire for revenge—tolerance wasn’t enough to counter such injustice.
3. Dictatorship and Power Greed:
   Leaders like Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito wanted global domination. Their actions were driven by ambition, not just intolerance.
4. Failure of the League of Nations:
   International bodies failed to act decisively—not just because of intolerance, but due to political weakness and appeasement.

Conclusion Points (Teacher or Students Can Summarize):

• Tolerance might not have solved everything, but it could have prevented many hostilities, especially among citizens and minorities.
• Both political wisdom and social tolerance are essential to maintaining peace.
• In today’s world too, lack of tolerance continues to cause global tension, reminding us of the importance of Forster’s message.

A.9. Speech: “Tolerance – The Need of the Hour”

Good morning respected Principal, teachers, and my dear friends,

Today, I stand before you to speak on a value that is more relevant now than ever before — Tolerance: The Need of the Hour.

We live in a world that is growing more diverse and interconnected by the day. People from different backgrounds, religions, opinions, and ways of life share the same schools, cities, and countries. In such a world, tolerance is not just a virtue — it is a necessity.

“Tolerance is essential for mankind.” Without it, even love — the most powerful emotion — would perish. Tolerance is what allows us to live peacefully, to accept differences, and to work together despite disagreements.

Many believe tolerance is weakness. But as E.M. Forster rightly said, “Tolerance is not the same as weakness. Putting up with people doesn’t mean giving in to them.” It means understanding others’ beliefs, habits, and values — without necessarily sharing or accepting them. It is a sign of maturity and strength.

In today’s world filled with conflict, hatred, and division, tolerance is the lubricant that removes friction from life. Whether in our homes, schools, or society — tolerance enables coexistence. It helps us keep the peace, even when our opinions differ.

Education, too, plays a vital role here. The highest aim of education is to inculcate tolerance. We are not truly educated if we cannot respectfully listen to someone we disagree with.

“Tolerance does not imply lack of commitment to one’s own beliefs. It only condemns the oppression or persecution of others.” In other words, tolerance means standing firm in our values while still giving others the right to their own.

Let me conclude by saying that tolerance alone can sustain a shaky truce, whether between individuals or nations. In a world that’s increasingly fragmented by intolerance and hate, let us be the generation that chooses understanding over conflict, dialogue over silence, and peace over war.

Thank you, and have a wonderful day ahead.

A.10. For the English teachers to do the needful.

A.11. You have read about various types of essays. Under which of these categories think ‘On Tolerance’ falls? Give reasons to justify your choice.

Justification:

1. Explores a Personal Viewpoint:
   The essay presents Forster’s personal reflection on the importance of tolerance in a crowded, conflict-ridden world.
2. Deals with a Universal Human Value:
   Rather than focusing on facts or arguments, the essay thoughtfully examines tolerance as a moral and practical virtue, making it reflective in nature.
3. Encourages Introspection:
   It invites the reader to think deeply about how they deal with others, especially those they dislike — encouraging self-examination.
4. Philosophical and Thoughtful Tone:
   The tone is meditative and philosophical, asking questions like “What should we do when we don’t like others?” and offering wisdom drawn from life experience.
5. No Strict Argument or Persuasion:
   Unlike a persuasive or argumentative essay, it does not try to convince the reader aggressively. It gently reasons why tolerance is essential.

Conclusion:

Therefore, ‘On Tolerance’ is a reflective essay because it presents the writer’s personal thoughts and insights on a timeless social and ethical issue in a thoughtful, meditative style.

A.12. Group work activity will be carried out by the teacher concerned.