Cosmopolitanism is concerned to disclose the ethical, cultural, and legal basis of political order in a world where political communities and states matter, but not only and exclusively. In circumstances where the trajectories of each and every country are tightly entwined, the partiality, one-sidedness and limitedness of “reasons of state” need to be recognized. While states are hugely important vehicles to aid the delivery of effective regulation, equal liberty, and social justice, they should not be thought of as ontologically privileged.
Two accounts of cosmopolitanism bear on its contemporary meaning. The first was set out by the Stoics, who were the first to refer explicitly to themselves as cosmopolitans, seeking to replace the central role of the polis in ancient political thought with that of the cosmos in which humankind might live together in harmony (Horstmann, 1976) . The Stoics developed this thought by emphasizing that we inhabit two worlds—one which is local and assigned to us by birth and another which is “truly great and truly common” (Seneca). Each person lives in a local community and in a wider community of human ideals, aspirations, and argument. The basis of the latter lies in what is fundamental to all— the equal worth of reason and humanity in every person. Allegiance is owed, first and fore¬mast, to the moral realm of all humanity, not to the contingent groupings of nation.
The second conception of cosmopolitanism was introduced in the eighteenth century when the term Welt burger (world citizen) became one of the key terms of the Enlightenment. The most important contribution to this body of thought can be found in Kant’s writings. Kant linked the idea of cosmopolitanism to an innovative conception of “the public use of reason,” and explored the ways in which this conception of reason can generate a critical vantage point from which to scrutinize civil society.
It is important to stress that cosmopolitan philosophy does not deny the reality and ethical relevance of living in a world of diverse values and identities. It does not assume that unanimity is attainable on all practical - political questions. The elaboration of cosmopolitan principles is not an exercise in seeking a general and universal understanding on a wide spectrum of issues concerning the broad conditions of life or diverse ethical matters (for example, abortion, animal rights, or the role of voluntary euthanasia). This is not how a modern cosmopolitan project should be understood. Rather, at stake is a more restrictive exercise aimed at reflecting on the moral status of persons, the conditions of agency, and collective decision-making. It is important to emphasize that this exercise is constructed on the assumption that ground rules for communication, dialogue, and dispute settlement are not only desirable but essential precisely because all people are of equal moral value and their views on a wide range of moral-political questions will conflict. The principles of cosmopolitanism are the conditions of taking cultural diversity seriously and of building a democratic culture to mediate clashes of the cultural good. They are, in short, about the conditions of just difference and democratic dialogue. The aim of modern cosmopolitanism is the conceptualization and generation of the necessary background conditions for a “common” or “basic” structure of individual action and social activity.
1.Which of the following values did the Stoics emphasized?
2.The aim of modern cosmopolitanism is to （ ）.
3.Which of the following does not apply to the cosmopolitan philosophy?
4.The principles of cosmopolitanism are about （ ）.
5.The word “entwined” in the first paragraph is closest in meaning to （ ）.
