Cosmopolitanism

In the Introduction, Appiah sets out the primary and secondary aims of his argument. He is, first, interested in making a case for cosmopolitanism, a potentially more optimistic framework for global ethics than globalization, although he does express some worry that the term “cosmopolitan” has an elitist connotation (xiiii). He also introduces his model of conversation, which is the method of learning to live with people different from us that he returns to throughout the text.

Appiah also expresses interest in providing philosophical context for post-9/11 debates about the impact of globalization. (This book was published just five years after 9/11, at a high point of interest in academic work about global extremism.) Appiah references “fretful discussion about the divide between ‘us’ and ‘them’” (xx), and he wants inject his claim that global and local conflicts are not created by differing values into the conversation. He emphasizes that he is not a policymaker, but he is interested in the possibility of de-emphasizing global differences, looking instead for what is shared. This has implications for those studying fundamentalism or other reactions to globalization.

The Introduction also establishes Appiah’s methodology and style. This is, significantly, a personal story; one of the most consistent sources of Appiah’s examples, stories, and case studies is his own autobiography, specifically his experiences with his multicultural, multinational family and his hometown of Kumasi, the capital of Ghana’s Asante region. Appiah establishes his own history by describing his parents and his childhood in Kumasi. He uses first-person pronouns and includes informal observations, such as his strong memory of Mr. Baboo, “mostly because he always had a good stock of candies and because he was always smiling” (xix). These memories are part of Appiah’s argument; he uses them to add credibility to the idea that cosmopolitanism and conversations can and do exist in the real world. They also add a flavor of memoir to this book of philosophy.

Appiah uses other diverse source material for his argument. He bases his argument on hypothetical situations, on historical arguments, and on examples taken from culture. For example, he begins the chapter with an imagined scenario—a baby from tens of thousands of years ago abducted by a time traveler and raised in the present day—to point out that human beings have not greatly changed (xi). He makes use of a character from literature (Daniel Deronda from George Eliot’s 1873 novel Daniel Deronda) as an example of a figure who balanced both particular identity (Jewishness) and cosmopolitan identity (xvii).

Although the subject matter is complex and serious, Appiah’s style remains relatively informal and personal throughout the Introduction. He employs epigrams and wit to make points in a warm, accessible manner. For example, when claiming he will not speak to globalization policy, he quips, “I’m a philosopher by trade, and philosophers rarely write really useful books” (xx). He writes in a style aimed at nonacademic as well as more specialized audiences, to ensure his book is accessible to and appeals to the broadest audience possible.