Kwame Anthony Appiah Analysis

Base on the document, cosmopolitan was a place where people with different or shared the same ideas and culture existed or lived. I will discuss how the city of Baghdad and the city of Hangzhou were cosmopolitan. Firstly, the city of Hangzhou was the largest city during that and Marco Polo describes it through his visit. According to his account, the city was 200 square mile and it consisted of a lot of bridges which makes the city beautiful and attractive. Mostly the occupation of the people were merchants or craftsmen. In chapter nine, merchants were traders and some even adopted the Chinese culture through mostly marriage. The manner in which business activities was done also shows the city was cosmopolitan. The city had ten main markets

Multiculturalism is the process of immigration and globalization of societies in the world. The world is made up of a mix of many nationalities, cultures, groups, orientations, or ideologies. Multiculturalism involves the acknowledgment of the different groups of ethnic people, cultures, and regions as opposed to the accepting an ideology of a single cultural identity or nation. Interculturalism involves the aspects of anthropology, cultural learning, psychology, and communication. It is these factors that cause the conflict and contrast between different generations, ethnic groups from different regions, and different character traits. The evolution of these struggles provides the root of the formation of the humankind in the society. Finally, the concept of transculturalism is the blending of all human culture styles. It involves combining elements of more than one culture. Transculturalism creates history, diversity, and the support to one another in the formulation of various vibrant experiences.

Conversation is the root of cosmopolitanism. Appiah mentions that "we need to develop habits of coexistence: conversation in its older meaning, of living together, association (Appiah 48)," supporting the idea of cosmopolitanism by encouraging tolerance and understanding between every being, not just on a international level, but also on an individual level. This also ties into multiculturalism in a simple and straightforward definition: the existence of many cultures in one place. In order for all cultures to function peacefully there must be a strong sense of conversation, in both its older meaning and its simple meaning of talking to one another. Appiah 's childhood town; Kumasi, located in the capital of Ghana 's Asante region; was a melting pot of cultures. Appiah gives no

The influence of Cosmopolitans do acknowledge the fact that many people believe that their culture is being threaten by competition due to worldwide economy. Appiah uses as an example how Asantes farmers have been able to sustain their lives because of cocoa trees and they fear that if there were a downfall due to globalization as it did in the past, then they will have to find another way of sustaining their lives and that might be challenging for these people just as it might be an upbringing to others- as I stated before there are many pros and cons to this idea, just as globalization might bring out many opportunities to many communities, along the way many sacrifices will have to be implemented.

Appiah’s account of cosmopolitanism dates back to the origin to reveal its significance and depth in history. He begins with the Cynics where the term cosmopolitanism meant “citizen of the cosmos”. Their understanding of this phrase referred to citizens being under the same universe, similar to unifying citizens around the globe. It emphasized the singularization of various groups and banding them together based on their human commonality. In

Multiculturalism is the act of giving equivalent consideration regarding various foundations in a specific setting, and it can happen when a purview is made or extended by amalgamating zones with two or more diverse societies or through migration from various locales around the globe. Multiculturalism that seeks in keeping up the peculiarity of numerous societies is regularly differentiated to other settlement arrangements, for example, social mix, social osmosis, and racial isolation. Multiculturalism has been depicted as a "salad bowl" and "cultural mosaic" (Burgess, et al. 2005). In spite of the way that multiculturalism has predominantly been utilized as a term to characterize distraught gatherings, numerous scholars tend to center their contentions on outsiders who are ethnic and religious minorities, minority countries, and indigenous people groups. The term multiculturalism is frequently utilized as a part of a reference to Western country states, which

Cosmopolitanism teaches us the value of valuing through engaging in multiple learning dialogue and reflection. Cosmopolitanism is the idealogy that all human beings belong to a single community, based on a shared morality. According to cosmopolitanism, every person has global strature as the ultimate unit of moral concern and is therefore entitled to equal respect and consideration no matter what her citizenship status or other affiliations

Cosmopolitanism is the idea that everyone in the entire world is one community. The philosopher Diogenes translated the world cosmopolitanism to mean “citizen of the world” (Appiah, 85). But what does it mean to be a citizen

I bring a staunch advocacy for cosmopolitanism. Central to this, is an understanding that our background informs our beliefs and behaviors; I am conscious that my own upbringing predisposes me to certain beliefs, and I am patient with others of different experiences. If you take the time to listen and understand, you position yourself to possibly be enriched. Even if you disagree, you don’t walk away empty handed; you will have gained an understanding of how that person thinks, and in further discussions you can use that to appeal to them in a more relatable way.

Despite the fact, that the critiques of cosmopolitanism discussed thus far have been valid, I disagree with Calhoun’s criticism regarding cosmopolitanism’s liberal bias (Tasson: Course Slides (W5)). Placing the individual at the center of cosmopolitanism, is necessary in promoting individual human rights, and replacing idealization with realism. By focusing on “the individual”, cosmopolitanism will be able to take into account the real life conditions and human rights violations that occur. Once these conditions become known, we are better able to understand an individual’s life and make real

Cosmopolitanism: Travel, Nature, Progress, Freedom, and Social Contract. I believe that these characteristics and values are still highly prominent and significant within the contemporary generation today from multiple different perspectives. For instance, in today’s society advancements are on a rise within different fields such as technology and science. Furthermore, individuals and citizens living within this country have the right of freedom of speech and are able to assemble without fear and punishment. Moreover, the founding fathers of the United States turned to political theorists such as John Locke and

Each belief has a function of interpretation, and the need for interpretation is a function that is situated at a specific time and place. Hence, We need all the perspectives to achieve the universal ethics as possible, but not fall into Universalism; as many means of approach to other but trapped by particulars. The examples of public ownership of art, belief in witchcraft and science, they have all challenged this ancient stream of thought in a world full of strangers, rather the existence of different shows that people are bound together by our common value and humanity. In modern society, we are interdependent and through this organic unity, we know Cosmopolitanism is a universal trait of humankind. Cosmopolitanism is what we have come aware of through modern transportation and information system. Whatever cosmos means to us today, in our current situation, it functions as an approach to work with forms of differences. At the heart of Cosmopolitanism, the goal is not to categorize different models of thinking/knowing and put them into a hierarchy, instead to allow people have the freedom to opinion. Without a fixed criteria of the epistemic norm of truth, and focused our shared value on humanity, we can ascribe freedom to everyone and advance human civilization as a

The ideal society for many of us is a place in which mutual respect exists for all. A place where despite our different perspective and beliefs we can come together and coexist in peace. This ideology is called cosmopolitanism. The idea of a cosmopolitan society has been around for thousands of years, it has created controversial arguments on whether its principles could benefit our community by helping us achieve a deeper level of understanding towards one another. Throughout the world, there are disputes because of our different perspectives and values. What if we could mitigate conflicts by integrating cosmopolitanism into our daily lives? In Appiah’s text, Making Conversation, he contributes fundamental ideas that could help society achieve and understand the notion of cosmopolitanism. Many cultures hold beliefs contrary to ours. In many cases, these practices can be taboo to us but acceptable to others. Cosmopolitanism is the solution to our conflicts that stem from a disparate set of views of how things should occur. Applying the notion of cosmopolitanism can aid us in our quest to understand and respect others, take into account our differences, and remain open-minded to the diverse ways of living life.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines ‘cosmopolitan’ as something that is “common to the whole world,” or a person who is “at home in all parts of the earth or in many spheres of interest” (1978, 301). Now, how, on Allah’s earth, can we talk about “Muslim” world cosmopolitanism?

One philosopher who aligns himself with Appiah’s general positive and optimistic direction is Thomas Pogge, a professor of both philosophy and international relations with Yale University, though large elements of his theories also line up with the theory of Hardt and Negri. Pogge’s philosophy concerning cosmopolitanism serves as both a methodological middle ground between Empire and Appiah’s cosmopolitanism and a philosophical synthesis between the different approaches to increased globalism. One way in which Pogge does this is to establish within his methodology several standards and parameters within which he sets his own philosophy. The first is a distinction which he makes between moral and legal philosophy: “legal cosmopolitanism is committed to a concrete political ideal of a global order under which all persons have equivalent legal rights and duties—[people] are fellow citizens of a universal republic. Moral cosmopolitanism holds that all persons stand in certain moral relations to one another: [people] are required to respect one another’s status as ultimate units of moral concern” (Pogge 356). In this way, Pogge’s approach is very Kantian, as it constitutes treating all people as ends-in-themselves, instead of merely as means, which corresponds with Appiah’s own assertions about the basic dignity of all people and the obligation to relive suffering out of a sense of shared humanity. Pogge’s own approach falls under moral cosmopolitanism, as opposed to legal,