Cosmo #1

In Cosmopolitanism, Kwame Appiah has some really valid points. He discusses how we communicate, what problems arise as a result of this, and how to proceed when perhaps, inevitably, differing views collide. He suggests that disagreements arise because: "we can fail to share a vocabulary of evaluation, we can give the same vocabulary different interpretations, and we can give the same values different weights (Appiah, 66)." In our classroom experiment, we saw how very different people even in the same place at the same time with the same purpose (being students) could vary so much. There were different cultures, races, religions, ages, socioeconomic backgrounds, etc. If there are that many differences in just our class, the differences that exist on a global level must be unfathomable. Later in the book, Appiah goes in to the roll of middle class women in American society just a few decades ago. A woman running for a political office outside of a local election simply would not happen. Luckily that has changed. The same can be said for homosexual couples (Appiah 77). Though there still exist some groups that are opposed to women working outside of the kitchen, or two men wanting to get married, the fact of the matter is that starting the social conversation on these issues helped to make our society as a whole more understanding even if everyone does not necessarily agree. Why is this important? Because everyone does matter. People in the supply chains are no different. We discussed in class briefly the dogfood fiasco, and the mattel toy fiasco that seems to still be going on. When we work from the angle that everyone matters, we see that it is imperative not only that everyone is treated with respect, but that all parties are heard and understood.