Cosmopolitanism

Theories of justice and intellectual property are vast topics in their own right. The contributions to this volume examine how they relate. How do our justifications for protecting intellectual property fare from an ethical perspective? Any attempt to tackle this question in a relatively short chapter like this one will have to be restricted in scope. My claims are limited in four ways. First, I concentrate on one kind of intellectual property protection, namely patents. Second, the claims of justice put (...) forward concentrate on one context of justice, namely the distribution of health goods. Third, the discussion of distributive issues concerning health is limited further in that I single out the distribution of drugs rather than, for instance, access to doctors or hospital services. Finally, I adopt a cosmopolitan perspective, emphasising inequalities in the access to drugs at the international rather than at the national level. (shrink)

Cosmopolitanism is widely understood as justified by or an expression of a particular normative moral or political theory, but this paper argues for a new conception of cosmopolitanism that sees it simply as a personal perspective or stance toward other cultures and people. Cosmopolitan guests are committed to ethical pluralism and so they deny that there is any single, universal conception of the good, but they are also motivated by the prospect of learning new, inspiring, and ultimately satisfying ideas about (...) what it is to be a human being that they might adopt or perhaps come to advocate. In these respects, cosmopolitan guests are like people who dedicate themselves to developing the attitudes, skills, and tastes needed to become oenophiles, gourmands, or lovers or music or fine art. In such cases too, there is no grand, overarching normative moral or political theory justifying their pursuits; they are motivated and become committed to such a life by being inspired, uplifted, and satisfied by the lives such endeavors offer for consideration. Committed cosmopolitan guests advocate for the adoption of their chosen ideal in the institutions and societies in which they live but, given their commitment to ethical pluralism, they are not in favor of the state mandating any particular form or style of life. -/- . (shrink)

This article intends to probe the related issues of nationalism, patriotism, and cosmopolitanism from the perspective of Confucianism and present some observations and remarks. First, it examines nationalism and patriotism as two potentially related and possibly mutually transformed concepts in but not limited to the Chinese context. Second, it proposes how to properly understand cosmopolitanism in terms of the relationship between patriotism and cosmopolitanism and points out a key problem that cosmopolitanism has to address. Third, it highlights the Confucian understanding (...) of humanity, self, and all-under-heaven, not only to present the Confucian perspective on these three issues but to locate Confucianism in regard to the contrast between patriotism and cosmopolitanism. Finally, it recommends Confucianism as a form of rooted cosmopolitanism or cosmopolitan patriotism, which, among various traditions in the world, can provide a theoretical and practical resource for reconciling the tension between cosmopolitanism and patriotism/nationalism. The Confucian perspective in this article is not based on one or more particular Confucian figures or texts. Rather, it is a view developed by a Confucian scholar, not only a scholar of Confucianism. (shrink)

This article, based on the Analects and other texts related to Confucius, uses the concept of “cosmopolitanism,” which has a long history in Western cultural tradi­tions, as a point of reference. Through an examination of both Confucius’ thoughts and practices, it argues that Confucius was a cosmopolitan. On this basis, it further identifies the characteristics and significance of Confucius’ “rooted cosmopolitanism,” which not only embodies the core consensus of all forms of cosmopolitanism—transcending regional and ethnic boundaries— but also centers on (...) universal human values. It avoids the issues of extreme cosmopolitanism, which can become abstract, generalized, and detached, by maintaining a balance between “one principle” and “many manifestations.” -/- . (shrink)

Debate between Dan Demetriou (Philosophy, Minnesota Morris) and Michael Huemer (Philosophy, Colorado), forthcoming in Problems in Applied Ethics: An Introduction to Contemporary Debates, Steven Cowan, ed. (Bloomsbury). The main essays are 5000 words or fewer; replies are 1500 words or fewer. This penultimate version is published here with permission from the editor.

The present war in Ukraine has seen millions of women flee as refugees, while martial law forbids adult men under 60 from leaving the country. According to various reports, many and perhaps most women Ukrainian refugees are breaking romantic ties with the men they leave behind, building new lives with men in their countries of refuge, and/or planning never to return. I avoid any comment about the morality of these events, and instead take up the general question of whether women (...) war refugees have any obligations of “connubial loyalty” to their menfolk in circumstances where those men are discharging a moral obligation to fight in the war that precipitated their womenfolk’s flight in the first place. I answer that they do. (shrink)

My aim in this chapter is to describe and resist two intellectual tendencies when thinking about how to do political philosophy in India today. The first involves a resistance to ‘Western political thought’, as alien, unfamiliar, or simply inappropriate for thinking about Indian political realities. The estrangement from Western political thought as 'foreign' comes with a concomitant instinct regarding how we should do political theory in India, namely by engaging with Indian thinkers and traditions, both ancient and modern. -/- My (...) primary aim is to resist this division between ‘Western’ and ‘Indian’ thought, particularly when the ‘Indian’ in Indian political thought is taken to be a matter of origins, motivating a search for the indigenous. My own answer to the question posed by the title of the chapter – “What is ‘Indian’ about Indian Political Thought” does not rest upon such a division. Indeed, I believe that there are forms of engagement with Western political thought in an Indian context which are not different in kind from engagement with that thought in a Western context. These engagements are not well described as doing either ‘Western’ or ‘Indian’ political thought. (shrink)

This article argues that Fabre’s cosmopolitan war is implausible because it ignores the psychological realities of war. Building on J.L. Mackie’s notion of an ‘ethics of fantasy’ – a morality reduced to lip-service and incapable of action-guiding – I argue that a view based on a flawed view of either human agency or the environment in which it is exercised is doomed to practical irrelevance. In rejecting patriotism and advancing a highly individualistic view of war, Fabre relies upon a highly (...) flawed view of human agency, ignoring the psychological mechanism of depersonalisation essential to large-scale cooperation and the practice of war. In Part I, I offer an initial account of what an ‘ethics of fantasy’ is and offer one major reason why certain moralities fail as practical guidance. In Part II, I contrast Fabre’s moral cosmopolitanism with ancient cosmopolitanism; I focus on her rejection of patriotism and other identity-based forms of partiality. In Part III, I summarise key findings, mostly in social psychology, on how large-scale social cooperation is achieved. I highlight the central role of depersonalisation and its felicity conditions. In Part IV, I argue that Fabre’s view faces a dilemma. Either her cosmopolitanism is compatible with identity-based partiality, or it is not. If not, then she does not even have a view of war given that large-scale cooperation requires it. If her view is compatible, then she needs a functional replacement for patriotism. I conclude by showing that the alternatives fail to satisfy the felicity conditions of depersonalisation which war requires. (shrink)

The global allocation of vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic is widely perceived as unfair. Priority was given to countries that paid the most with little or no concern for who needed the vaccines the most. No satisfactory institutions have been established to allocate vaccines in a future pandemic. In this paper, we join reformers in proposing a new scheme for vaccine distribution: a global auction for vaccines where profits are distributed fairly to participating countries. Our proposal improves upon previous suggestions (...) morally by taking countries’ differing valuations of money and vaccines seriously. Since an auction is in the interest of both vaccine manufacturers and high-income countries, it is also politically feasible. A global redistributive auction for vaccines thus promises to be a robust and morally desirable way to allocate vaccines. -/- . (shrink)

Argues that humans are animals that philosophize about their condition by fictionalizing other animals.

The need to use green taxes to protect the environment is urgent, particularly because of climate change, and can be justified via sound deontological and consequence-based arguments. One very influential criticism of such taxes, however, claims that they disproportionately burden relatively poor individuals who tend to contribute to environmental problems far less than wealthier persons. Critics can also object that because of the link between economic inequality and environmental destruction it is preferable to adopt environmental measures that impede rather than (...) accelerate the growth of inequality. Defusing these criticisms, the article argues that various types of green fiscal reform can both avoid disproportionally burdening those who pollute least and reduce the economic inequalities that income taxes leave behind, and slow down the collectively self-defeating consumption arms race that currently besets so many affluent societies. Global progressive environmental taxation is also a possibility, and even easier to justify. (shrink)

According to political minimalism, a debate is considered political when it revolves around the question “What shall we do?” This account suggests that certain issues related to human enhancement technologies (HETs), which have traditionally been addressed in the realm of applied ethics, could be better approached from a political standpoint. However, this raises the question of who constitutes the “we” – the communities that face the political challenges posed by HETs. We argue that there is a global human community that (...) directly faces at least some of these challenges, and this fact underscores the relevance of a cosmopolitan perspective. While some authors have already advocated for a cosmopolitan approach in addressing issues such as poverty or climate change, they often do so from a moral outlook, without adequately distinguishing between ethics and politics. In contrast, we assert that HETs present compelling arguments in favour of cosmopolitanism as a political stance. In support of this claim, we consider two cases: the pills that would allow people to eat at will without gaining weight, and the choice between different types of cognitive enhancers. (shrink)

In this chapter, Daniel Layman argues that there is not one Lockean conception of IR but rather (at least) two mutually incompatible conceptions: one a Ciceronian moral cosmopolitanism and the other a colonialism centered on British interests. Opposing Locke’s philosophical writings with his economic works, Layman’s reading acknowledges the contradictions and incoherence present in Locke’s IR theory.

This Insight examines the stance the EU should adopt towards the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the basis of the political thought of Immanuel Kant, Thomas Hobbes, and Niccolò Machiavelli. Taking as its starting point Josep Borrell’s comment that “we are too much Kantians and not enough Hobbesians” at the 2022 EU Ambassadors’ Conference, this Insight offers a revisionist interpretation of both Kant and Hobbes while suggesting Machiavelli as a third possible inspiration for EU external action. Although he is often (...) portrayed as a proto-“realist” intent on increasing state power, Hobbes in reality favours stability above all else and would therefore presumably not support a more “aggressive” foreign policy. Kant, on the other hand, has traditionally been seen as more of a philosophical idealist, but his political philosophy in fact supports a more assertive conduct by states in their external relations. Both of these philosophers are thus quite different from how Borrell portrays them. The Insight also introduces the perspective of a third thinker, Machiavelli, whose philosophy suggests that the EU should adopt a pragmatic diplomatic strategy, forging alliances, supplying Ukraine with weapons, and maintaining strong ties with allies. (shrink)

Smith asks whether patriotism and cosmopolitanism spring from the same source. If they do, we face two anomalies. First, we should expect a British subject to love France more than Great Britain because France has a larger population than Great Britain. Second, we should expect a British subject to love France more than a far-away country such as China given that the British subject is more familiar with the French than with the Chinese people. Both expectations are factually untrue. This (...) led Smith to reject the patriotism-cosmopolitanism continuum thesis. The love of country must spring from a source that is unrelated to the love of humankind. Nonetheless, neither kind of love can be reduced to substantive utility that informs the economist’s utility function and the social welfare function. Substantive utility appears as self-interest and other-interest (altruism). The altruist preference varies in intensity, depending on familiarity: people are ready to help more familiar people than less familiar ones. What complicates the discussion is that Smith uses the same term “familiarity” to discuss varying degrees of love: people tend to love more familiar people than less familiar ones. This paper sheds light on Smith’s confusing concept “universal benevolence”—which is best understood as the love of humankind. (shrink)

El texto ofrece dos propuestas: el cosmopolitismo institucional y el cosmopolitismo de la responsabilidad. El primero, como sugiere el término, confía en el mantenimiento de las instituciones jurídicas y políticas, pero éstas deben reestructurarse para responder a las nuevas exigencias de la sociedad contemporánea. El cosmopolitismo de la responsabilidad subraya la importancia de construir efectivamente deberes y espacios de rendición de cuentas para todos los actores nacionales e internacionales. Como resultado, se vislumbran propuestas como la diligencia debida en el contexto (...) de los desastres climáticos o incluso las violaciones estructurales de los derechos humanos. Además, el concepto de rendición de cuentas se alinea con los estudiosos de las teorías decoloniales, en las que los conflictos raciales y religiosos plantean importantes desafíos al cosmopolitismo crítico. La cuestión central es descubrir si el cosmopolitismo -unido por neologismos que surgen para expandir el campo lingüístico hacia nuevos conceptos para nuevas realidades- puede encontrar alternativas a la falta de efectividad de los derechos y deberes humanos a nivel nacional e internacional. El método utilizado fue la hermenéutica fenomenológica porque no hay interpretación sin comprensión. (shrink)

This timely intervention into the debate about the legacy of the Enlightenment highlights both the plurality and the continuing relevance of Enlightened cosmopolitanism to contemporary global concerns, linking cultural history with the history of ideas and politics, in a global perspective.

This project originates from the necessity to explain an uncanny fusion detected between cosmopolitan characteristics which Antonio Gramsci ascribed to Italian intellectual culture and the anti-humanistic connotations displayed by Italian Thought. Traditional cosmopolitan discourses inheriting the legacy of the Enlightenment generally align with humanistic perspectives whereas, as Roberto Esposito observes, Italian Theory has endorsed anti-humanistic viewpoints ever since the age of the Renaissance. How does one explain such a connection? Also, how are we to justify the ascetic categories of mysticism, (...) weakness, slowness, bareness, etc. which proliferated among Italian thinkers starting from the late 1970s? In response to these questions, this work attempts to define the position that contemporary Italian philosophy defends with respect to the current debate on cosmopolitan theory. Neo-Kantian solutions proposed by authors such as Jϋrgen Habermas, Daniele Archibugi and David Held, will certainly be given some consideration. Importantly, these discourses acknowledge the necessity to rethink the role of both the state and international relations in view of the brutalities perpetrated by 20th century totalitarianisms and the present globalized geopolitical scenario. Advocating a reinforcement of global powers and counting faithfully on the authority of law, these theories nonetheless elicit some perplexities. On one hand, they presuppose a disbelief within people’s self-emancipating capacities and, on the other, are not sufficiently critical of the neoliberal agenda. This is even more evident when considering that most of the said authors do not express skepticism with respect to the promotion of human rights. While human rights are certainly needed now more than ever, in several cases they align with both a profit-oriented and imperialistic mentality. It is relieving to discover that cosmopolitanism was initially founded by the Greek Cynics as a non-humanistic discourse and that several authors, including Peter Sloterdijck and William Desmond, highlighted similarities connecting Greek Cynicism with contemporary European modes of thinking. The Cynic perspective can help one solve many of the aforementioned doubts, because it rejects conventional societal values such as wealth, fame, and power, while promoting moral ideals of liberty, equality, self-sufficiency, and ascetic practices. In view of these premises, this study will pursue the hypothesis that, beginning with the publication of Massimo Cacciari’s Krisis (1976), Italian Philosophy and Literature have embraced a critical rhetoric which partially moves away from Marxian views and gradually retrieves cynic ideas. More specifically, the inquiry will unfold along two different paths: the historical-cultural analysis will be utilized as a material support for reaching theoretical-philosophical targets. Regarding the historical-cultural aspect, I will clarify to what extent contemporary Italian philosophy and literature retrieve Greek Cynic contents. This part of the theory will develop according to three fundamental factors which separate the sphere of the “human” from the domain of the “non-human”. The first two factors, “reason” and “language”, will be discussed within chapter 2 by exploring the work of Massimo Cacciari, Gianni Vattimo, and literature from the 1977 movement. “History” will represent the third pivotal discriminating factor in chapter 3, focusing on Franco Cassano’s Southern Thought and Giorgio Agamben’s post-humanism. The ultimate intention, which is philosophical, is to extrapolate from Italian Cynicism a critical cosmopolitan discourse that destabilizes neoliberal ideological structures and dissociates principles of local autonomy from cultural protectionism and anti-immigration claims. (shrink)

The article focuses on the symptomatic interpretation of some modern concepts that ap­peal to a cosmic order. Against the background of well-known “dark”, homeless systems proposed by such Western thinkers as Q. Meillassoux, K. Barad, D. Haraway, E. Thacker et al., trying to present pictures of a world “without us”, the author examines here anti-colonialist approaches that complement the conclusions of European and North American researchers in their own way. The author shows that the ideas of a direct connection be­tween (...) a moral act and a cosmic order or humanity spilled throughout the cosmos, al­though it turns out that they cannot be considered as the basis for universal coexistence, can nevertheless act as an engine of practical communication. With all fluctuations in the terminology that they use, in which the interchangeability of cosmopolitanism, cos­mology and space is not uncommon, combined with attempts to maintain the specificity of the “local”, it seems that these different works obviously tend to construct a new spe­cial type of statement. (shrink)

Timo Miettinen’s recent book aims to re-articulate Edmund Husserl’s whole phenomenological project by reading him as a “universalist cosmopolitan” thinker (123). Drawing on Husserl’s late works, es...

Declaring a cosmopolitan right to scientific progress risks perpetuating many of the inequities it aims to overcome. This calls for a re-imagination of science that directly responds to science’s links to violent nationalist projects and the harms of capitalism.

A provocative defense of a forgotten Chinese approach to identity and difference Historically, the Western encounter with difference has been catastrophic: the extermination and displacement of aboriginal populations, the transatlantic slave trade, and colonialism. China, however, took a different historical path. In Chinese Cosmopolitanism, Shuchen Xiang argues that the Chinese cultural tradition was, from its formative beginnings and throughout its imperial history, a cosmopolitan melting pot that synthesized the different cultures that came into its orbit. Unlike the West, which cast (...) its collisions with different cultures in Manichean terms of the ontologically irreconcilable difference between civilization and barbarism, China was a dynamic identity created out of difference. The reasons for this, Xiang argues, are philosophical: Chinese philosophy has the conceptual resources for providing alternative ways to understand pluralism. Xiang explains that “Chinese” identity is not what the West understands as a racial identity; it is not a group of people related by common descent or heredity but rather a hybrid of coalescing cultures. To use the Western discourse of race to frame the Chinese view of non-Chinese, she argues, is a category error. Xiang shows that China was both internally cosmopolitan, embracing distinct peoples into a common identity, and externally cosmopolitan, having knowledge of faraway lands without an ideological need to subjugate them. Contrasting the Chinese understanding of efficacy—described as “harmony”—with the Western understanding of order, she argues that the Chinese sought to gain influence over others by having them spontaneously accept the virtue of one’s position. These ideas from Chinese philosophy, she contends, offer a new way to understand today’s multipolar world and can make a valuable contribution to contemporary discussions in the critical philosophy of race. (shrink)

African ethicists have so far not agreed on a single, precise, secular and comprehensive basic norm, an Afro-Grundnorm, which captures the core values of Ubuntu sub-Saharan African cosmopolitanism. This article constructs and proffers the ‘double-dignity’ Grundnorm that partly shares with Western stoic cosmopolitans the view that our common human ontological capacity for autonomy identifies us as members of the human species. This capacity grants our first dignity, inherent dignity. Inherent dignity only grants our universal basic (security and subsistence) rights. Our (...) duties to care of each other derive from the second dignity, acquired dignity. Acquired dignity itself derives from our second ontological capacity, our capacity for communion. Unlike inherent dignity, acquired dignity is neither universal nor automatically present in us. It is earned when we commune with others in fostering harmony as we earn ‘full personhood’. Since fostering harmony starts with nurturing communal identities and solidarities, Ubuntu entails efficiency-model moderate cosmopolitanism which permits prioritizing serving our immediate associates or compatriots not because of their special moral worthiness but because we more efficiently serve humanity at large when we do so. (shrink)

It is often assumed that cosmopolitan thinkers since the Renaissance have simply adopted and refined concepts from classical antiquity. This study argues that modern European cosmopolitanism should be perceived as a unique phenomenon, distinct from Greek and Roman forms of cosmopolitan thinking. One key feature is its dynamism, or the idea of change built into modern theories of cosmopolitanism. Covering the period from the 1530s to the 1920s, this book investigates various manifestations of cosmopolitanism, including normative individualism, the dawn of (...) historical thinking, and the dynamic conceptions of law and rights and of the international community. It analyses the international legal theories of selected authors from Francisco de Vitoria to Austrian lawyers Heinrich Lammasch and Alfred Verdross. The author focuses in particular on the development of hospitality rights and the right to immigration, republicanism and cosmopolitanism, and cosmopolitan education. (shrink)

From climate change, debt, and refugee crises, to energy security, environmental disasters, and terrorism, the events that lead nightly newscasts and drive public policy demand a global perspective. In the twentieth century the world sought solutions through formal institutions of international governance such as like the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, and the World Bank, but present-day our responses to global realities are often more provisional, improvisational, and contingent. Tracing this uneven history in order to identify principal actors, contesting (...) ideologies, and competing rhetoric, Negative Cosmopolitanism challenges the Kantian ideal of cosmopolitanism as the precondition for a perpetual global peace. Uniting researchers working on contemporary problems with those studying related issues of the past--including slavery, industrial capitalism, and corporate imperialism--essays in this volume scrutinize the entanglement of cosmopolitanism within expanding networks of trade and global capital from the eighteenth-century to the present. By doing so, the contributors pinpoint the ways in which whole populations have been unwillingly caught up in a capitalist reality that has little in common with the earlier ideals of cosmopolitanism. A model for provoking new and necessary questions about neoliberalism, biopolitics, colonialism, citizenship, and xenophobia, Negative Cosmopolitanism establishes a fresh take on the representation of globalization and modern life in history and literature. (shrink)

Draws on Marx and the first-generation Frankfurt School to make the case that cosmopolitanism must become a postcapitalist political theory.

Cosmopolitanism seeks a political ethics of world togetherness and a political aesthetics that can contribute to this task critically and imaginatively. Regarding political ethics, I explore the world as a “cosmopolitan mind” composed of “dialogic voices” and threatened by neoliberalism, neofascism, and other nihilistic “oracles.” I also construct a criterion for determining which public artworks (1) resist oracles and (2) help us imagine a “cosmopolitan democracy” and its political ethics. The latter includes the concordance of three ethico-political virtues—solidarity, heterogeneity, and (...) fecundity (creating new voices through the interplay among other voices)—and must appeal to different peoples worldwide. I also examine how this political ethics and aesthetics can be applied to nonhuman life and non-sentient formations in a non-anthropocentric manner; indeed, how the cosmos in its entirety and plurality can also be thought of as voices and participants in the cosmopolitan mind and its artistic expression. Moreover, I contend that my ontology of dialogic voices and proposed public art criterion, like the cosmopolitan mind itself, are “events” or “becomings.” This means that there can never be an articulation of the ontology that is final nor a public art criterion that could curtail the imaginative reach of art. (shrink)

Promising new solutions or risking unprecedented harms, science and its technological affordances are increasingly portrayed as matters of global concern, requiring in-kind responses. In a wide range of recent discourses and global initiatives, from the International Summits on Human Gene Editing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, experts and policymakers routinely invoke cosmopolitan aims. The common rhetoric of a shared human future or of one humanity, however, does not always correspond to practice. Global inequality and a lack of accountability (...) within most institutional contexts of international governance render these cosmopolitan proclamations of ‘one human community’ incoherent and even harmful. More generally, there exists no shared normative standard for the cosmopolitan governance of science, with which such global initiatives could be evaluated. Taking a broadly philosophical perspective, the present paper aims to better understand this problem situation, identifying three high-level challenges global governance of technoscience: problematic ideals of technology and science, the unjust formation of “global” concerns, and the limitations of cosmopolitan theory. By holistically engaging these jointly empirical and normative sites of inquiry, scholars can better support humanity’s re-imagination of technoscientific practices within and beyond the nation-state. (shrink)

What is the relationship between cosmopolitanism and secularism—the worldwide and the worldly? While cosmopolitan politics may seem inherently secular, existing forms of secularism risk undermining the universality of cosmopolitanism because they privilege the European tradition over all others and transform particular historical norms into enunciations of truth, valid for all cultures and all epochs. In this book, the noted philosopher Étienne Balibar explores the tensions lurking at this troubled nexus in order to advance a truly democratic and emancipatory cosmopolitanism, which (...) requires a secularization of secularism itself. Balibar argues for the idea of the universal against its particular dominant institutions. He questions the assumptions that underlie popular ideas of secularism and religion and outlines the importance of a new critique for the contemporary world. Balibar holds that conflicts between religious and secular discourses need to be reframed from a point of view that takes into account the cultural hybridization, migration and mobility, and transformation of borders that have reshaped the postcolonial age. Among the topics discussed are the uses and misuses of the category of religion and the religious, the paradoxical genealogy of monotheism, French laïcité’s identitarian turn, and the implications of the responses to the Charlie Hebdo attacks for an extended definition of free speech. Going beyond circumscribed notions of religion and the public sphere, Secularism and Cosmopolitanism is a profound rethinking of identity and difference that seeks to make room for a renewed political imagination. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Swami Vivekananda's Vedāntic Cosmopolitanism by Swami MedhanandaAnantanand Rambachan (bio)Swami Vivekananda's Vedāntic Cosmopolitanism. By Swami Medhananda. New York: Oxford University Press, 2022. Pp. xv + 412. Hardcover $99.00, isbn 978-0-197624-46-3.As a young man, Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902), founder of the Ramakrishna Mission, addressed a direct question to the teachers he encountered in his quest for religious certainty. "Have you seen God?" asked Vivekananda. The first affirmative reply to his question (...) came in 1882 when he met Ramakrishna (1836-1886), who eventually became his teacher and mentor:"Do you believe in God, Sir?" asked Vivekananda."Yes," replied Ramakrishna."Can you prove it Sir?""Yes.""How?""Because I see him just as I see you here, only in a much intenser sense."(p. 144)Ramakrishna's unhesitating reply had a deep impact on the young Vivekananda. "For the first time," said Vivekananda, "I found a man who dared to say that he saw God, that religion was a reality to be felt, to be sensed in an infinitely more intense way than we can sense the world" (p. 144).This pivotal encounter with Ramakrishna and his claim about the perception of God found more systematic expression in Vivekananda's arguments for supersensuous perception as the only ultimately authoritative source of knowledge about the nature of God and other matters that are not accessible through our ordinary ways of knowing. Medhananda's book, Swami Vivekananda's Vedāntic Cosmopolitanism, is a wide-ranging discussion of many facets of Vivekananda's interpretations of the tradition of Advaita Vedānta and religion in general. These include the decisive influence of Ramakrishna on Vivekananda, Vivekananda's departure from Śaṅkara, and his understanding of the possibilities and limits of reason, the nature of faith and the hard problem of consciousness. The single theme, implicitly and explicitly, present throughout his discussion, is the reality and epistemic significance of mystical experience: "For Vivekananda, we can achieve 'objective certitude' of God's existence…through a self-authenticating realization of God that guarantees its own veridicality" (p. 285). [End Page 1] Medhananda ends his work calling for greater recognition of the importance of spiritual experience for our understanding of the nature of consciousness (p. 371). One comes away from his work thinking that the edifice of Vivekananda's philosophy stands or fall on his arguments for supersensuous perception as the highest authority for religious claims. Medhanananda is critical of appeals by Vivekananda to scripture unless such appeals are buttressed by affirming the supremacy of supersensuous experience (p. 341). Medhananda regards references to scripture alone as dogmatic. In those Advaita traditions, however, that regard scripture as a source of valid knowledge (pramāṇa), arguments for scripture are not asserted without appeals to reason and the evidence of other sources of valid knowledge (Rambachan 1991). In other words, appeals to scripture are not always dogmatically irrational.At the end of The Limits of Scripture: Vivekananda's Reinterpretation of the Vedas, I invited those who are the direct heirs of Vivekananda's legacy and those movements who have come under his influence "to provide a consistent and coherent account of the synthesis that he attempted" (p. 137). I regard Medhananda's work as a significant contribution to this much-needed task. His work on Vivekananda is an exercise in apologetics, understood as the effort to defend and clarify religious teachings through systematic argument, and is one of the most detailed, scholarly, and vigorous contemporary expositions of Vivekananda's thought. As a work in apologetics, however, readers will not find any significant criticism of Vivekananda's thought. The single significant one I found is his observation that there is a patronizing element in Vivekananda's situating of dualistic traditions on a lower salvific level than non-dualism (pp. 88-90).I am heartened by the fact that Medhananda acknowledges important differences between Vivekananda and Śaṅkara on several significant issues. As a scholar-monk of the Ramakrishna Order, Medhananda's position is unusual on this issue, and he must diverge from prominent members of his Order in this regard. At the heart of this difference is Śaṅkara's insistence on the... (shrink)

I defend the cosmopolitan instrumentalist theory of secession, according to which a group has a right to secede only if this would promote cosmopolitan justice. I argue that the theory is preferable to other theories of secession because it is an entailment of cosmopolitanism, which is independently attractive, and because, unlike other theories of secession, it allows us to give the answers we want to give in cases like secession of the rich or secession that would make things worse for (...) minorities. I defend the view against the objections that it allows for colonialism and annexation, that it is not a distinct theory, and that it is impractical. (shrink)