Appiah Dialogue And Deliberation Summary

“Dialogue and Deliberation” by Josina Makua and Debian Marty and “Cosmopolitanism” by Kmawe Anthony Appiah, discuss how it is important to look at and listen to other people’s views and beliefs in order to be fully engaged. Makua and Marty believe that through constructive engagement, we can have a peaceful world but we are not there yet because we live in a world of arguments. People argue to win and to get their beliefs heard but they refuse to listen to other people’s beliefs. Similarly, Appiah discusses about how values shapes everyone and how through different cultures there are different values. Appiah states that in order to understand others we need to put ourselves in their shoes and think about their values.

In Dialogue and Deliberation,

Josina Makau and Debian Marty discuss how argument culture affects how we have conversations with each other. They state that in an argument, people are looking to win the argument rather than just stating their sides. Makua and Marty go on to explain how students in debate programs are taught how to choose a side and argue extensively for that side. “although students in these programs develop important abilities to consider alternative perspectives through their research on ‘both sides’ of each issue, much of their research focuses on securing ‘evidence’ in support of a case,” (13). Marty and Makua are saying that students are taught to gather evidence on their side, they are not taught to research on their opponent’s side. By not looking at the other side, they are not able to fully comprehend the topic they are arguing about. Which relates to everyone when they are arguing, people tend to only look at their own side and they refuse to look at the other side. They do not listen to the other side because they do not want to change their position, they want to stick with their position, and argue their position until they win. It can be beneficial to look at the other side because you are able to understand where the other person is coming from and you are able to understand their beliefs and their views.
In chapter 2 of Dialogue & Deliberation, Marty and Makua go on to explain how people “experience negative thoughts and feelings” (21) towards people who have opposing views. They state that when having conversations with people with opposing views, we tend to turn it into a “fight”. This ends up harming our relationship with the other person. Then Marty and Makua explain how we are all interdependent of each other and other creatures of the planet. They give the example of the honey bee and how we rely on bees to pollinate our crops. If the honey bee were to go extinct, it is possible since they colonies are collapsing, then us humans will be in danger because we will not have the bees to pollinate our crops. Like how we depend on bees we depend on each other; we depend on each other to do what is right and do our part in the community. Josina Makua and Debian Marty then discuss the “sticking point.” Makua and Marty defines “the sticking point” as “the moment in a disagreement beyond which the involved parties will not budge” (25). Makua and Marty describe “the sticking point” as the point where people refuse to change their views or agree with their other side.
In chapter 3, Josina Makua and Debian Marty discuss “deliberative inquiry.” They describe deliberative inquiry as “a spirit of critical inquiry and a common quest for informed and wise decision making” (39). But because of confirmation bias, “adversarial advocates” do not become really informed, they grab any information that supports their side and use it to win however they never become informed on the other side. Marty and Marty then state how people tend to “avoid addressing disagreements” however they claim that “When confronted directly, honestly, respectfully, responsively, and thoughtfully, disagreement has the potential to illuminate issues otherwise not apparent on the surface” (41). Marty and Makua are saying that we should confront disagreements in a positive and respectful, and in doing so we are able to address other issues that we were not aware of before. Also, they go on to explain that constructive engagements can bring out “peaceful coexistence” around the world.
In Chapter 4 of Cosmopolitanism, Kwame Anthony Appiah discuss values and how throughout different cultures or even in the same culture we disagree on values.

One example that Appiah gives on opposing values is on abortion, he says that one person can believe that “abortions should be legal, if the mother chooses” (45), while another believes that “killing a fetus isn’t even bad as killing a grown-up cat.” Appiah goes on to write that through cosmopolitanism engagement we should “expect such disagreements.” Appiah then discusses thin concepts and thick concepts. Appiah believes that thin concepts involve terms like “good” or “bad,” while thick concepts are terms like “rudeness.” He goes on to explain how different cultures have different values. For example, in his culture the definition a good father and a good uncle are different from England’s definition of what a good father and a good mother is. In his culture, it is the uncle who takes care of a family and the father does not matter in that family a whole lot.However in England the father is the one who takes care of the family while the uncle does not matter in the family. Appiah continues on to explain how in different cultures there are different values and it is important to look at other people’s values to understand why they do the things they

do.
In Cosmopolitanism and Dialogue & Deliberation, the authors discuss the idea of the “Golden Rule” which states “What you do not wish done to yourself, do not do to others” (Appiah 60).

Appiah, Makau and Marty believe that the Golden Rule is important in understanding another person’s point of view. Makua and Marty’s interpretation of the Golden Rule is that it “encourage us to hear others as we wish to be heard” (19). On the other hand, Appiah interprets it as “we should take other people’s interests seriously” (63), because what we would wish to be done us, sometimes might not be the same as what another person would wish to be done to them. We all have different beliefs and values, so we should understand other people’s values and put ourselves in their shoes then decide what they would want done to

them.
In Cosmopolitanism and Dialogue & Deliberation, the authors believe through cosmopolitanism and constructive engagement, we can discuss our disagreements. In both books, the author believe that engagement helps with dialogue and understanding. Also both books discuss how understanding other people’s values and ideas can be beneficial in understanding why people have the beliefs and their ideas. As Makau and Marty point out looking at the opponent’s point of view helps a person get a better understanding of a certain topic.