COURSERA COURSE:

THE MODERN AND THE POSTMODERN WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY

Peer Assessment 8

Respond to one of the two following prompts:

If Hegelians are right, then there are no ahistorical criteria for deciding when it is or it is not a
responsible act to desert a community, any more than for deciding when to change lovers or
professions. Richard Rorty

Respond to one of the two following prompts:

Discuss how two of the authors we have read in this course have addressed the issue of whether
or not one needs ahistorical (unconcerned with or unrelated to history, historical development,
or tradition) criteria for deciding on human responsibility.

Or

Which two thinkers in our course do you think Anthony Appiah would consider cosmopolitan
in his terms?

COSMOPOLITANISM IN LUDWID WITTGENSTEIN AND CHARLES BAUDELAIRE

In a general and etymological sense the term cosmopolitan refers to an individual who
considers himself or herself as a citizen of the world as a whole, rather than limiting his identity
to a specific place within it. Anthony Appiah would draw rely from said notion and will be
fundamental within the framework of his philosophical position regarding identity and
multiplicity.

Properly referring to the notion of cosmopolitanism Appiah states that [c]osmopolitans think
human variety matters because people are entitled to the options they need to shape their lives in
partnership with others
1
. Thus, as a citizen of the world one must be collectively responsible for
each and every other human being and one must also be open to the possibility of difference and
heterogeneity. Consequently, the objective of the present essay is to demonstrate how through
interpretation Ludwig Wittgenstein and Charles Baudelaire may fall within the scope of this
notion.

1
Anthony Appiah. Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers.

Starting with Wittgenstein one must first consider the focus of his work and the practical
consequences derived from it, specifically regarding his views in his work Philosophical
Investigations. Thence, Wittgenstein is interested in the ordinary use of language, of how we
communicate with one another, and with the meaning we attribute to words in varying set of
context. In this sense, he stated that [a] meaning of a word is a kind of employment of it. For it
is what we learn when the word is incorporated into our language
2
.

The abovementioned quote means that the meaning of a word is defined by the use that one
makes of it according to a particular language game in his terms denying the assumption that
words mirror reality. Now then, Wittgensteins acknowledgement of a wide variety of language
games which one is always playing and which arise through social interaction should be thus
understood as an acknowledgement of multiplicity or to put in Appiahs terms of
multiculturalism which is a cornerstone of cosmopolitanism.

Similarly, Charles Baudelaire prose poems in Paris Spleen as well as his understanding of the
emergence of the modern world should also be considered as characteristic traits of a
cosmopolitan. Having experienced the drastic changes that took place in Paris and in the whole
of Europe within the midst of the 19
th
century, Baudelaire is fascinated with the possibility of
chance encounters which the modern cities offer.

It must be noted then that the process of industrialization which cities such as Paris experienced
consequently entailed a concentration of diverse personalities from different classes of society
within a common ground; a fact that is well exploited by Baudelaire in his poems. For instance,
in Madam Bistoury he wrote that [w]hat oddities one finds in big cities when one knows how to
roam and how to look!
3
. And said characteristic of being open to different identities and their
peculiarities are a common trait of Baudelaires prose, as evidenced also in a poem such as The
eyes of the poor
4
in which opposed to the luxuries that the narrator and his female partner
experience, outside the window they observed one man and his two sons wearing rags, delighted
at the sight before their eyes.

Thus, one may hold the view that both authors were deeply concerned with the possibilities of
difference and peculiarity which ordinary life continuously put at our disposition. Wittgenstein
will pay due attention to the language games developed which inform our words with meaning,
meanings that will change according to the circle or groups in which we are interacting.
Baudelaire, on his end, will be interested will and look forward to interacting with any kind of
stranger with a distinctive feature, granting a primordial importance to the possibility of
2
Ludwig Wittgenstein. Philosophical Investigation.
3
Charles Baudelaire. Paris Spleen.
4
Ibid.

difference and multiplicity and, consequently, both authors may be considered cosmopolitans in
Appiahs terms.