There has been some confusion and hand-wringing about the final paper. In particular, I am sensing a certain panic about how the various concepts relate to cosmopolitanism.

To that, let me say this. Cosmopolitanism, if anything, follows one major rule, i.e. the Golden Rule: "do unto others as you would have done unto yourself." Historically, this idea can be found in many cultures and texts, from Confucianism to Christianity. The best way to understand whether an ethical rule is a good rule is to try to think about how it would apply to all people, particularly those living in very different contexts.

While a good idea, the question is how to implement this Golden Rule in the context of guding human development (particularly through science and technology). The Universal Declaration on Human Rights is essentially 30 examples, essentially, of how you would like to like to be treated by others. Distributive Justice is a way to think about how we would want to be treated fairly, for example, if we needed a kidney transplant. Procedural Justice addresses how we, and therefore everyone else, would want to be treated if we were facing a legal or criminal case (particularly if we were innocent.) Intergenerational Justice asks us to think about how future generations would want to be treated if their interests were represented in our current decisions. Non-violence indicates how we may want to be treated in most any context, and suggests that violence only creates the cycle of further violence. Basically, the meta-rule would be the Golden Rule, while how we implement that rule can be seen in how we think about the various theories and institutions listed here: http://www.personal.psu.edu/ews11/blogs/sts-101-f10/2010/12/cosmopolitanism-4---theories-supporting-an-overall-framework.html

For those wanting to try the second question on social networks and media, here are some examples to think about.

Say you were one of the people in James Nachtway's photos, perhaps the family living by the train in Indonesia. What would you want the world to know about your situation? How would you want the media to treat you if you were in poverty or a refugee of war or genocide?  

Think about any time Facebook changed its privacy settings. Did it upset you how they went about it? By what proceedure did Facebook decide to change the settings? (Procedural Justice) Do you think it is fair how Facebook can change? Facebook attempts to be a resource that appeals to just about everyone. As a kind of "global commona" by what principles does Facebook try to appeal to? Also, access to Facebook requires certain social status, literacy, and access to technology. Does this fully satisfy the concepts of distributive justice?

Mainly, for this paper, I want you to think about how the Golden Rule ought to be applied in various situations, and by what specific rules (justice, equity, procedure, precaution, etc) you think we ought to satisfy the Golden Rule. As well, you don't have to use all theories and readings in support of your discussion, but you certainly have to demonstrate that you read and comprehended a significant portion of them.

Theories and applications of justice:
Procedural Justice
Intergenerational Justice
Distributive Justice
Non-violence

Institutions and organizations:
UDHR
UNHCR
UNFCCC
Amnesty International
UNESCO
WWF
Geneva Convention

Measurements of Human Well-Being:
HDI
GNP
GNH

What are defining principles of cosmopolitanism?

The word 'cosmopolitan', which derives from the Greek word kosmopolitês ('citizen of the world'), has been used to describe a wide variety of important views in moral and socio-political philosophy. The nebulous core shared by all cosmopolitan views is the idea that all human beings, regardless of their political affiliation, do (or at least can) belong to a single community, and that this community should be cultivated. Different versions of cosmopolitanism envision this community in different ways, some focusing on political institutions, others on moral norms or relationships, and still others focusing on shared markets or forms of cultural expression. The philosophical interest in cosmopolitanism lies in its challenge to commonly recognized attachments to fellow-citizens, the local state, parochially shared cultures, and the like. (Kleingeld, Pauline and Brown, Eric, "Cosmopolitanism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/cosmopolitanism/>.)

Cosmopolitans think human variety matters because people are entitled to the options they need to shape their lives in partnership with others. (Appiah 104)

Do we enforce difference and diversity? How is this different than imposed segregation?

"I am human: nothing human is alien to me."

A tenable cosmopolitan tempers a respect for difference with a respect for actual human beings - and with a sentiment best captured in the credo, once comic, now commonplace, penned by that former slave from North Africa. Few remember what Chremes says next, but it's as important as the sentence everyone quotes: "Either I want to find out for myself or I want to advise you: think what you like. If you're right, I'll do what you do. If you're wrong, I'll set you straight." (Appiah 113)

"We can respond to art that is not our; indeed, we can fully respond to "our" art only if we move beyond thinking of it as ours and start to respond to it as art. But equally important is the human connection.... The connection through a local identity is as imaginary as the connection through humanity. The Nigerian's link to the Benin bronze, like min, is a connection made in the imagination; but to say this isn't to pronounce either of them unreal. They are among the realest connections that we have." (Appiah 135)

"Every cosmopolitan argues for some community among all human beings, regardless of social and political affiliation. For some, what should be shared is simply moral community, which means only that living a good human life requires serving the universal community by helping human beings as such, perhaps by promoting the realization of justice and the guarantee of human rights. Others conceptualize the universal community in terms of political institutions to be shared by all, in terms of cultural expressions to be appreciated by all, or in terms of economic markets that should be open to all." (Kleingeld, Pauline and Brown, Eric, "Cosmopolitanism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/cosmopolitanism/>.)

"The strict cosmopolitans always... with the claim that the duty to provide aid neither gets weighed against any extra duty to help locals or compatriots nor increases in strength when locals or compatriots are in question.... Moderate cosmopolitans... acknowledge the cosmopolitan scope of a duty to provide aid, but insist that we also have special duties to compatriots. Anti-cosmopolitanism in the moral sphere best describes the position of those communitarians who believe either that our obligations to compatriots and more local people crowd out any obligations to benefit human beings as such or that there are no obligations except where there are close, communal relationships. Economic cosmopolitanism is perhaps less often defended among philosophers and more often among economists and certain politicians, especially in the richer countries of this world. It is the view that one ought to cultivate a single global economic market with free trade and minimal political involvement. It tends to be criticized rather than advanced by philosophical cosmopolitans, as many of them regard it as at least a partial cause of the problem of vast international economic inequality." (Kleingeld, Pauline and Brown, Eric, "Cosmopolitanism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/cosmopolitanism/>.)


What are institutions of cosmopolitanism or that would support cosmopolitan ethics in practice? What is the purpose of these institutions?

How do science and technology find relevance or direction in cosmopolitanism? How does technology provide a certain foundation for contemporary cosmopolitanism to exist?

Is a website like WikiLeaks based on a cosmopolitan ethic? Is this a risk ?

How do we enforce cosmopolitan values? Or is this a paradox?

 

 

The Dynamic Structure of Social Values

In preparation for the future, it is important to consider value systems in order successfully benefit from the preparation.  Even short-term planning is not independent of value, and to consider it as such can prove dangerous.

In Parable of the Sower, the protagonist Lauren Olamina prepares for future events in various stages, using a different rationale for each.  When within the gated community where she grows up, she prepares herself for the future by creating an "emergency pack" in case she had to leave.  However, her preparations were made without much thought to her family or friends.  This is not because she values her own life over theirs, but rather because she makes an assumption that they will continue to coexist as they had for decades regardless of her presence or absence.  Her value in the beginning, therefore, seems to consist of more of a cost-benefit analysis, since she weighs the risks and benefits of leaving as she prepares her package of seeds, books, etc.  She values hope for a future, but it is an individualistic hope for her own personal future.  This is more along the lines of the rationalization as described by Randall Collins in Sociological Insight.  He claims that independent rational thought is mostly governed by cost-benefit analysis whereas social contracts and structures are more held together under an irrational logic of trust and legitimacy.   

Once Lauren is forced to leave the community and unify the differing logical reasoning amongst the members of her growing group of refugees, she begins to operate under a system that values cooperativeness, and a risk analysis of the whole group rather than just herself.  The backbone of her new value-set emerges and evolves around a moral value system, which Collins would consider irrational but necessary to society, that holds Earthseed at its foundation.  In order to start anew at Bankole's property, the group must accept God as change, and begin to shape Earthseed.  In one of her verses she refers to the value of cooperativeness and solidarity within this religious sect: "Once or twice/ each week/ A Gathering of Earthseed/ is a good and necessary thing...[it] unifies people" (Butler 214).  
In another segment, she explicitly describes the need for valuing the needs of the group over the individual: "Embrace diversity/ Unite--/ Or be divided,/ robbed,/ ruled,/ killed/ By those who see you as prey./ Embrace diversity/ Or be destroyed" (196).  This incorporates yet another value--diversity.  Not only does this describe the value of unity and solidarity, but it also values difference.  :difference as a unifying capacity rather than a dividing one.  Specifically, the group plans to build a community both practically--through growing seeds, keeping hidden from outside threats, etc.--and morally--through accepting and practicing Earthseed.  

Personally, when preparing for the future I consider both intrinsic and instrumental values.  I value family, friends, and nature and could unite them under the intrinsic value of love.  I feel that unconditional love is essential in pursuing a life of peace and happiness with those around me.  I also value essential needs such as health and dignity, both for my own future and for the future of others.  These could be considered within Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Maslow claims that in order to achieve happiness and love one must first meet physiological needs.  The most "basic physical requirements [include] the need for food, water, sleep and warmth" (Cherry).  After which follow the needs of "safety and security" followed by self-esteem, and finally self-actualization, "self-actualization, which is a process of growing and developing as a person to achieve individual potential" (Cherry).  Without meeting basic instrumental needs, one cannot achieve personal growth and individual development since he or she will be too preoccupied with meeting the basic needs.  I feel that once my own basic needs and the needs of my family are met, I will be able to weigh out the objective details of my career, household, and income and focus on more intrinsic values such as love.

Once basic needs are met in an immediate future, intrinsic values can influence planning even over longer periods of time.  When considering things with instrumental value, like means to acquire basic needs, I generally consider a shorter forecast.  For example, a new home as an instrument in the pursuit of a healthy, safe lifestyle is something that I could consider now, though its value for me in the future may change.  Right now I may be considering renting an apartment when I attend graduate school, but ten years from now I may be considering buying a larger house in which to raise a family.  My education would need to be fulfilled before I could move up into a more complex social structure of a family.  Therefore, though the value of a home is constantly present, its instrumental implementation changes over time, thereby changing the intrinsic values it can be used to uphold--these intrinsic values being independence in an apartment as opposed to having a loving family in a larger house for example.  In addition, when weighing the costs and benefits of getting an apartment after college rather than living at home, I am able to consider the value of independence, because it is a personal value.  However, with more intrinsic or cultural values I could not simply weigh my own costs and benefits, because they could be detrimental to other members of my small social group.  For example, if I were engaged and chose to get an apartment alone, it might be beneficial to my own independence but it would not be sensible for starting a family.
 
The implementation of certain values may also be postponed over time.   As we observed in the film 6 Degrees, global warming could be a serious threat to the value of nature even fifty years from now.  To continue with the house vs. apartment example, I cannot practically begin to consider buying a hybrid car, or doing an energy audit on my house as described in the film, until I have established a job that can allow me to afford to implement these changes towards protecting my value of nature and environment.  However, the apartment can serve as an instrumental value to achieving these goals, since I need to live on my own in order to study at a University that will allow me to get a job, which will pay for such lifestyle changes.  Therefore, when planning far into the future, a hierarchy of values can help determine which values are most important to implement always, which are important to implement in the future, and which are important to implement now in order to obtain the stronger future values.  In this way, new technologies are embedded in a cost-benefit analysis of values.  The fact that a hybrid car exists can only help decrease carbon emissions if one values the environment enough to care about buying a hybrid car, and if one has the means to buy the car.  If one does not have the means currently, he or she must weigh the costs of postponing his or her environmental values in order to obtain a means to achieve them.  

This assumption can be generalized within the scope of society as a whole.  Technology is intricately interwoven with value when planning for the future of a society.  In order for a new technology to progress, there must be an accepting climate.  For example, in the case of the Three Gorges Dam in China, the major decision-makers of the country decided to implement the relatively modern technology of dams in order to fulfill the values of economic development and increased gross national product.  Since the governing officials held these values in high regard, they chose to forgo any humanitarian or environmental values until a later time so that they could implement this new technology.  For example, the government could promise to provide land, again at a later time, for the displaced individuals, but the construction of the dam takes precedence: the value of economic development presides over the value of right to property in order to someday provide a higher gross national product thereby supposedly increasing jobs and income levels for the general population.  

Using this logic, it is possible to consider that the danger facing society within the next 50 years lies not within physical threats of environmental degradation and climate change as described in 6 degrees, but in the threat of apathy and ignorance.  When weighing values it is important to recognize that risk-benefit calculations inflict objectivity on the subject in question.  Weighing the personal risks over the personal benefits, as Collins describes in his critique of rationalization, can be dangerous when determining which values should take precedence for society as a whole.  Society needs value to exist: "it is our subjective feelings about the world that could, more than the objective value of practical payoffs we receive" (Collins 19).  
 
 Perhaps there is no denominator to average the risks of implementing one value over another.  The example of the Three Gorges Dam, shows that though the value of economic development may intend to increase incomes and job availability, it cannot be compared to the environmental and humanitarian risks taken to achieve this 'benefit.'  This emphasizes Marx's point in Technology as Progress:  "The distinction...turns on the apparent loss of interest in, or unwillingness to name, the social ends for which the scientific and technological instruments of power are to be used"  (Marx 11).  He describes these "political goals" as "minimalistic definition of civic obligation"  (Marx 11).  In other words, there is an apathetic view of the effects of the new technology on certain social problems.  In addition, the "goals" minimize or average any consideration of values by only considering the civic obligation in terms of increased capital rather than the wider definition of human dignity.  This perspective limits or undermines the good of many of society's members.  

The progress of technology is difficult to weigh on many standards because it is difficult to determine who has the authority to average the general risks and benefits in order to compare them.  Certainly an entire lifestyle of a village lost in the displacement process is not comparable to the ability for a member of the middle class to buy a new car--even if it were a hybrid.  However, in City of Quartz, Davis describes how police within the borough system of Los Angeles, CA help to physically shape the structure of society into inverse prisons in order divide society into the wealthy and the poor, the safe and the dangerous.  This action upholds the value of safety, but undermines the value of shelter for those homeless thereby constricting their potential to change their lifestyle.  It would be highly difficult for someone already considered as an outsider by the very structure of the walls, to attempt to achieve some sort of dignity by obtaining a job within a shopping mall for example.  It may be seen as "progress" for these buildings to be structured to ensure the "safety" of those within, but it is certainly not progress for those being kept out.  

Complex dynamic systems of values are too interconnected for one technological advancement to be considered progressive in general.  The danger lies in seeing this complexity as too much to manage, and choosing apathy over value.  It is apathy that provides a possible denominator to average this risk-benefit analysis, and apathy allows an excuse for ignorance.  A leader may feel overwhelmed with economic and humanitarian burdens, and choose to simplify everything apathetically, thereby averaging the risks and benefits with the denominator as monetary value, allowing him to ignore the consequences in the name of technological progress.

Therein lies the question of religion as well, which Collins raises in "The Sociology of God."  He claims that in modern society individualism has overridden previous notions of worship and spiritual ritual.  However, he also noted that "because we are encouraged to present an ideal self in each [group situation]...all this inner complexity emerges" (Collins 57).  The inner complexity of the individual prevents us from truly knowing ourselves, similar to the complexity of the value systems within a larger society.  In complex and dynamic systems, it is impossible to find a way to average each factor in order to compare the benefits of one thing over another, similar to how it is impossible to find a common factor in order to determine the true, core nature of one individual.  When examining personal value systems, one must consider personal complexities; likewise when examining social value systems, one must consider social complexities, rather than simply accepting apathy and ignoring some social issues which may appear unmanageable.  

Rather than valorizing apathy, it may be possible to work from a value of love and compassion for fellow human beings.  Money could not be an averaging agent in this case and instead people could work towards progressing education, or health, or availability of food and drinking water, or safety.  Human beings should be regarded with dignity, regardless of wage-earnings, or proximity to a new 'advancing' technology.  The risk involved with this new value system would be rather high since many people would be forced to change, and change is never easy.  In Parable of the Sower, Butler uses her main character's religion to valorize change, though it is difficult for the members of the group to understand it.  Practically though, if value systems, such as one operating under the value of love, were considered before monetary value, damaging social changes could potentially be avoided.  Society's members each shape their values and contribute to the values of the whole--in this way, values are important in shaping society as well as individuals.  


Works Cited
Butler, Octavia E. Parable of the Sower. 1993. Grand Central Publishing: New York.
Cherry, Kendra. "Hierarchy of Needs: The five levels of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs"
About.com.2010.
http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/hierarchyneeds.htm
Collins, Randall. Sociological Insight.
Davis, Mike. City of Quartz. 1992. Vintage Press.
Marx, Leo. "Does Improved Technology Mean Progress?" Technology and the Future
"Three Gorges Dam."  International Rivers: People, water, life 2009, CA.
http://www.internationalrivers.org/china/three-gorges-dam

Inter-generational Considerations: The main questions in this category concern legacy. Primarily, the question concerns what kind of world we want to leave for future generations. At the temporal frame of 20 years and beyond, inter-generational considerations force us to ask what sort of long-term burdens our actions are generating. Imagine a reverse of what normally happens, we have a credit card we can use for our entire life, but it is our children who have to pay our credit card debt off. Again, this area is most prevalent in environmental considerations and has become a major question around global warming.


From the Constitutional Law Foundation (http://www.conlaw.org/Intergenerational-III-1.htm) "The most explicit manifestation of intergenerational concern in the federal constitution occurs in the Preamble:

    "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect
    Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
    common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings
    of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this
    Constitution for the United States of America." f208

The Preamble's posterity clause has quite a respectable historic lineage, with antecedents in such fundamental documents as the Magna Carta, f209 the English Bill of Rights, f210 the Pennsylvania Charter of Privileges, f211 the Massachussetts Body of Liberties, f212 the Massachussetts Declaration of Rights, f213 and the Virginia Declaration of Rights. f214 Each of these documents created a new political reality. As part of the act of creation, the framers in each case drew upon certain ritual formulas, one of the most important being reaffirmation of the present generation's responsibility to future generations. With each act of re-constitution, the spirits of the past and of the future were invoked, and the sanctity of the intergenerational community thereby reaffirmed."

http://www.constitution.org/bcp/penncharpriv.htm

http://www.intergenerationaljustice.org/

Some well considered critical responses: