Menu
header photo

Project Vision 21

Transforming lives, renewing minds, cocreating the future

Blog Search

Blog Archive

Comments

There are currently no blog comments.

A brief encounter of the cosmopolitan kind

Francisco Miraval“Spassiba!” I told her to thank her for bringing to my office some books I needed for my studies. “De nada,” she immediately told me and then she left the room. That brief encounter (no more than a few seconds) suddenly became a clear example of the new “cosmopolitan homogeneity” we experience in our times.She was not surprised I used a Russian word (one of the very few words I know in that language) and I was not surprised she spoke to me in Spanish. In fact, such a multilingual exchange frequently happens in that office, where more than 50 languages are spoken and were very often I have to apologize because I am fluent in only two languages (but I read and understand several languages.)Of course, the key point is not the linguistic exchange where one person speaks the language of the other person. That’s something somewhat difficult, but not impossible to achieve. The true key point was the ability to establish a personal connection with the “other,” valuing and celebrating the culture, language, history, and tradition of the other person. That’s what I felt during that brief dialogue. The situation where cultural and linguistic differences are accepted as a normal occurrence connecting people has been described by philosophers and sociologist as “cosmopolitan homogeneity.” One of those philosophers is Kwame Anthony Appiah, who grew up Ghana and now teaches at New York University. In his book Cosmopolitanism. Ethics in a World of Strangers (2006), Appiah analyzes the situation of our world and he proposes to move beyond the concepts of “globalization” and “multiculturalism” to arrive to a different idea, already explore by ancient Greeks: cosmopolitanism, which literally means “citizens of the world.”According to Appiah, a true cosmopolitan attitude has (or should have) to basic elements. First, it should include “the idea that we have obligations to others,” where “others” are not only those close to us who we know very well and with whom we share many things, from the country to many habits.Those “others” could be people far away from us of whom we know absolutely nothing except that we have obligations to them. The second element of post-modern cosmopolitanism is, according to Appiah, “(to) take seriously the value not just of human life but of particular human lives.” This means, he explains, that we should develop a serious interest “in the practices and beliefs that lend them (the lives of others) significance.”In other words, the citizen of the world lives his/her life according to two ideals: “universal concern” and “respect for legitimate differences,” recognizing that the others “often have the right to go their own way.” I must say I do not necessarily agree with everything Appiah says (perhaps because I have not yet studied enough his work), but I agree with the idea of celebrating the differences as a manner of connecting with other, not as a motive to distance ourselves from others. For that reason, spassiba for reading this column.

Go Back