Section 14 Group 4

Today our discussion surrounded around cosmopolitanism. As soon as we got situated, it seemed that the conversation went ahead and took off. We automatically asked, where is the line for “cosmopolitanism” drawn? What things would we see and look past, and what things would we see and try to intervene?

From the interview with Appiah, we brought up the female castration in other countries, and how we see it as repulsive. But, in some nations, it is seen as completely necessary and humane. Cosmopolitanism would say that we should learn how to accept the different cultures that we are surrounded by, but is this really tolerable?...

We decided that there are some cultural barriers that we don't comprehend, but somethings are just inevitable, based from centuries of cultural, or even religious belief.

We furthermore came to ask, what is harm? Is it emotional, or is it physical? How do we determine what is harmful, and what if the people of that culture don't recognize it as harm? What if they're not interested in help?

When we try to intervene with another cultures ideals, are we being productive, or are we just fueling a fire of intolerance?

Tolerance is very important, but tolerance only succeeds if tolerance is reciprocated. 

Intolerance will only breed intolerance, so cosmopolitanism has its flaws.

It was summarized that cosmopolitanism is possible, but only becomes productive and progressive when all cultures are involved in having the same set of ideals and outlook towards the cultures that surround them.