In a society shaped by religious, ethnic and cultural diversity, it is vital to continuously investigate which conditions genuinely foster social cohesion and successful integration.¹ Diversification and political or economic shifts change societies and common considerations regarding open-mindedness. Tolerance can guide continued or renewed legitimization of social and political order – even though both concepts contain contradictions in and of themselves with regard to normative guidelines or historical concepts and anthropological perceptions. ^{2, 3}

Current debates on issues like migration, integration, the legalization of same-sex marriage on the one hand and electoral campaigns by right-wing populist parties on the other – the latter of which foster anti-pluralistic attitudes – increase pressure on the social values that underpin open-mindedness, tolerance and public engagement down to the very definitions of these concepts. ⁴

 The phenomenon of Othering and its devaluation of social groups is well-documented in times of significant socio-economic change. For example, drastic changes in labour conditions foster fear of the future, fear of losing monetary power and social status, while simultaneously enhancing experiences of disaffection, disenfranchisement and estrangement.⁵

Definitions of open-mindedness, tolerance and public engagement shape one’s identity and thus play a vital role in differentiating between “us” and “them”, identity and alterity, belonging and non-belonging.⁶ As the postmodern discourse shows, these values and concepts define our ideas about community and communal living, and they are the prerequisites for equity and justice. Today, however, these definitions and values are being questioned and appropriated by xenophobic, antisemitic, homo- and transphobic political movements and redefined by the members of these movements. ⁷ Part of the effort regarding open-mindedness, tolerance and public engagement is to consider concepts of identity and alterity, i.e. the construction of self and other, as well as the dynamics of alienation and disassociation, historicity and media production and staging that are part and parcel of this construction.

The volubility of the three terms, open-mindedness, tolerance and public engagement, offers  a certain attractiveness as they can easily be instrumentalised for various ideologies. They can convey divergent goals simultaneously in one term, goals such as international peace, inner security, social equality and ecological sustainability, all ­­without tripping over the fact that in reality these are non-descriptive, diffuse social-political leitmotifs. ⁸

As such, the concept of public engagement and the respective „public weal“, have experienced an upswing in social political contexts since the 1980s. They can often be found in arguments against the individualisation of society and usually carry an, ostensibly self-evident, supremacy of morality.⁹ Colloquially, we use the term to describe an individual’s interest in common welfare.¹⁰ The issues of public engagement, an interest in communal wellbeing and, in its original meaning, common sense, have been discussed since Ancient Roman and have since run through a wide variety of definitions. All have been politically instrumentalised, most recently in the totalitarianisms of the 20^th century. Today, as the state continues to retreat from the public forum and makes room for the privatisation of its core responsibilities, this retreat also leaves a vacuum regarding the definitions of what exactly those responsibilities entail. Thus, the number of those individuals and groups who wish to shape what is understood as “public engagement” and “public welfare” are on the rise.¹¹

A similar history precedes the terms “tolerance” and “open-mindedness”. "Tolerance" especially gained relevance in the 16^th century, a concept employed to discuss how people of different faiths could live together peacefully. With the advent of the Enlightenment, its definition broadened and today tolerance describes an acceptance of religious and political beliefs and different ways of life,¹² as well as differing points of faith, customs and conventions.¹³

To us today, tolerance is a positive value of a democratic society. A value, however, that also includes rejection of what is tolerated, allowing one to simply let something pass under an (unacknowledged) amount of sufferance.¹⁴ Tolerance may develop into peaceful coexistence and even respect, thereby excluding indifference, though without going so far as to engender approval or appreciation.¹⁴ The word’s Latin origin “tolerare” translates as: to endure, to bear something, which underlines the fact that staying sceptical is integral to the concept. This also means staying sceptical with regard to the instrumentalization of the term by political interest groups, as well as the term’s utilisation as a positive value while ignoring its etymology.

The definition of “open-mindedness” follows a similar etymological history, defined as “liberal towards everything worldly or secular in contrast to a strict ecclesiastical view […] towards the empirical world and its peoples […] in contrast to a limited nationalistic mind set.” ¹⁵ Originally, however, the term gained popularity in philosophical anthropology when, at the beginning of the 20th century, Max Scheeler used “open-mindedness” to differentiate between humans and animals: according to Scheeler, an open-minded being rises above the primal instincts of an animal and is able to reflect upon the world around them. ¹⁶

In using open-mindedness, tolerance and public engagement as guiding themes, the Mercator Graduate Programme focusses on highly topical socials issues and offers space for innovative research by putting intercultural questions into a new context: by including the Humanities, the Social Sciences, Education, as well as Economics and the Life Sciences, the Graduate Programme combines fundamental research with theoretical, analytical, and practical empirical inquiry. The Graduate Programme brings together scientists from various disciplines to research under one joint subject while focusing on the promotion of young researchers.

Research concerned with the various facets of open-mindedness, tolerance and public engagement will be conducted by different disciplines: Theology, Philosophy, History, Social Science, Education, Political Science, Cultural Studies, Linguistics as well as Economics, Engineering and the Life Sciences. Given the current social and political developments, all disciplines must face the challenge of formulating new concepts for an open-minded, tolerant and publicly engaged society, and consider the respective consequences, ambivalences, opportunities and limitations.

The Mercator Graduate Programme’s objective is to establish a sound analysis of the different historical and current aspects regarding open-mindedness, tolerance and public engagement in pluralistic and democratic societies, as well as an in-depth study of these aspects from the vantage point of multiple perspectives. It is our goal to advance and nurture an interdisciplinary dialogue between the Humanities and the Natural Sciences next to implementing the synergies that arise from this enriching process.

The Mercator Graduate Programme’s location offers the opportunity to study in the City of Duisburg, in cooperation with local, civic, and economic stakeholders, the education, health and cultural sectors, as well as private citizens. This investigative emphasis on the City of Duisburg allows the Mercator Graduate Programme to build open-access location-specific datasets of unprecedented size, an invaluable addition to sustainable research.

Mission Statement Works Cited: Quellen Zum Webseitentext Forschung