No One Has to be Right

“Cosmopolitanism is an adventure and an ideal: but you can’t have any respect for human diversity and expect everyone to become cosmopolitan” ( Appiah XX).

The intro of cosmopolitan serves namely to define the meaning of cosmopolitan in context of which Appiah wishes to apply it. I feel that it is important that he does so because for myself I have always thought of a cosmopolitan simply as one who is well traveled and “cultured”, but Appiah brings a new aspect to the meaning of cosmopolitan: RESPECT.

“So cosmopolitanism shouldn’t be seen as some exalted attainment. It begins with the simple idea that in the human community, as in national communities, we need to develop habits of coexistence: conversation in its older meaning, of living together, association” (Appiah xix).

By way of Appiah’s definition he thinks we ought to live in a world where we are separated yes by our differences, but connected by a mutual respect for this differences. That we don’t necessarily have to agree with what each thinks, believes, or does, but simply that we understand and tolerate.

Finally to finish the definition of what a cosmopolitan would look like he gives two different strands of cosmopolitan, where some people are one, both, or neither:

1. “One is the idea that we have obligations to others, obligations that stretch beyond those to whom we are related by the ties of faith and kin” (Appiah xv).
2. “The other is that we take seriously the value of not just of human life but of particular human lives” (xv).

Ch.1 for Appiah serves to demonstrate how extremely cosmopolitan one may seem, yet only exemplify one strand of cosmopolitan life. Throughout he describes, Burton, an extraordinary linguist, multi-religious being christian as well as some Muslim religions, well written, and extremely well traveled which allowed him to be “immersed” into many cultures.

“One characteristic of Euro cosmopolitanism, has been a receptiveness to art and literature from other places, and a wider interest in lives elsewhere” (Appiah 8).

Despite a have a wider interest in lives elsewhere, he did not have an interest for the individual himself. This categorized Burton as a 2nd strand cosmopolitan with out the 1st: (recognition of our responsibility for every human being.) He was described to have had many chances to reduce human suffering but chose not to, and was also characterized as having many prejudices towards “darker skins”.

The second point Appiah makes in ch.1 is the idea that there is more than just one way to look at things, and if you only see one way then you are surely mistaken. For this reason many people disagree on things that seem 100% accurate to other people because it is something they believe and have known. One example he uses is how Muslims think they MUST make the hajj but someone else who does not share their beliefs would not at all see that:

“But if you don’t have the beliefs that give those acts their meaning, you presumably think that the people who do think so are mistaken” (Appiah 9).

One way to adjust for this clash in beliefs is respect in the form of understanding. We can for example say that because it is important for the Muslims to make this pilgrimage for their moral well being and sense, then that we do agree they should go.

“Give our reason for them to do something that they do for a different reason” ( Appiah 10).

Ch. 3 is an extension of one in a sense that it reiterates the idea that we may not fully comprehend the reason someone thinks or does something, but as long as we are able to accept that they do do it, then we are practicing a way of respect for their ideas. Not only that we should respect their ways, but because trying to sway someone from a core belief brings many more challenges then one would probably anticipate.

One example he gives is how are you to argue something as religion or craft?

“You would first have to understand it…and then you would be invited to explain all sorts of facts you were unaware of, whose explanations you did not know” (Appiah 36).

It is extremely hard to change as way in which a human being has grown, each individual lives a different reality based on the way they learned. These learned experiences combined, make up our perceptions of the world we live in. So even to try and change some one’s mind you would have to also be able to see almost into their psych and be able to present these ideas in a way that fits their perceptions.

“Hansons insight was that what it’s reasonable for you to believe, as you look out on the world, both depends on what you believe already and on what ideas you have been introduced to” (Appiah 41).

Long story short: No one has to be right.

Ch 4 introduces two different concepts that I feel will be key throughout the rest of the book in describing what kind of weight something carries:

Thin Concepts: ones that are universally known and pretty obvious: such as he describes, things being “good”. Good does not carry much weight with it, it’s not “heavy”. Really anything can be good or bad for that matter: I had a good day, that was a good cake, this book is good~ good in this sense simply is or is not.

Thick Concepts: ones that are deeper and more complex in meanings, and because of this sometimes can be particular to certain societies. Thick concepts from my understanding seem to more of moral rules, such as rude. Different societies have different ideas of what rude is depending on the culture.

By way of contrasting the Idea of Taboos and Morals Appiah defines morals as he sees them: Morals apply to everybody, if you act against morality it can be forgiven by an apology and these acts against morality don’t stay forever, and the I think the key point of morality is it’s all about how should treat other people (respect).

One notion Appiah brings forth in ch 4 that really caught my attention that I think requires a very high level of respect and understanding is that language is very textured in characteristic. By textured I mean that one sentence could mean a 100 different things based on what context it is said, how it is said, etc. There are so many different layers in which we interpret language.

He says something like, “I don’t think we could all come to the same agreement if only we had the same vocabulary”.

Finally one of the oldest rules in the book, that for most of us defined respect as a child: The Golden rule: Do to others, as you would want them to do to you. The major problem with this idea in the complex world we live in is that in order to apply this rule one has to know not only why they are doing things to others, how it matters to you, and how it will affect them. If we all have different views as previously discussed then what is good to me may be bad to another and vise versa, in this context then the golden rule may not seem so good anymore.. They key question here is, “Is what matters whether I’d like it done to me with my actual beliefs, or is what matter whether I’d like it done to me if I had their values and beliefs?”(Appiah 62)