From tolerance to the duty of civility or from the pluralism of ideas to the pluralism of people - Starting with the thought of John Rawls

Different conceptions of the world have been at the root of numerous confli cts. The difference between them used to be seen as intolerable. Rawlsian d emocracy, far from seeking to neutralize them and from dreaming of erecting a neutral State, seeks on the contrary to promote and valorize them. Is th is passage from intolerance to promotion without effect on these conception s themselves? Are they not modified in the process? Are they not confronted with the demand for a new relationship to the other, and therefore also a new relationship to what we believe we are entitled to think about the worl d? Are not our alleged differences in the process of yielding to the presen ce of the other in politics - a presence that is more and more difficult to sustain? With Rawls and his "duty of civility", we hit upon what the A. be lieves to be the main difficulty: we are no longer alone in sharing what ap pears to us as difference, and the relationship to the other is depicted by Levinas (as undesirable physics) come toe the foreground.