Chapter 5 of Cosmopolitanism contains the real meat of Appiah’s argument. He’s neither arguing in favor of a universal set of human values that we can all agree upon, nor suggesting that we ought to trade in our local cultural identity for some transnational world citizenship.

People can live harmoniously without agreeing with
another on principles or even why they think harmony is worthwhile. The goal seems to be to learn about each other, but not necessarily to change each other’s minds. What’s the value he sees in cross cultural conversation? How does it facilitate harmony without necessarily changing people’s views? What do you make of his claims? Why?


Calculate the price of your paper

Total price:$26
Our features

We've got everything to become your favourite writing service

Need a better grade?
We've got you covered.

Order your paper