開放的自由民主社會有一項顯明的特徵：社會中存在著許多不同的、甚至相互衝突的哲學思想、道德信念、以及宗教教義。這樣一個多元且時常有思想及信念上深刻不相容的情形發生的社會，如何能夠實踐正義，而又能維持穩定的秩序和社會的團結？自由而多元的社會能夠維持社會秩序而不至於分崩離析的基礎是什縻？一般都認為，容忍的價值（或德性）是自由主義用來解決這難題的重要辦法之一。然而，容忍的理論及實踐卻觸及相當困難的問題；自由社會如何在容忍多元和維持合理且穩定的社會秩序這兩者之間尋求一個均衡的解決？本文嘗試由較一般性的層次檢討容忍的概念以及容忍作為一項價值的意義，之後討論並批評羅爾斯在政治自由主義中所提的看法。

It is a salient feature of a liberal democratic society that there will exist diverse, and at times conflicting, philosophical, moral, and religious doctrines. How can such a society, one that is so profoundly divided, be just and maintain a stable social order and social unity at the same time? It is commonly perceived that the value of toleration is an important virtue for a liberal democratic society in this regard. However, there are complicated and difficult questions and problems, both at a conceptual and practical level, with the very notion of toleration. The core question is how can a liberal democratic society reach an equilibrium solution, in their attempt to resolve the conflict between pluralism and social unity? This paper starts out with a general discussion of the concept of toleration and the meanings of its value, followed with a focused discussion on Rawls's recent proposal in his ("article/paper/work" on?) political liber­alism, and ends with some critical reflections on Rawls's theory.