The Cosmopolitan Hobbit

The theme of the next essay by Dennis Knepp in The Hobbit and Philosophy is cosmopolitanism.  To be cosmopolitan is to be a citizen of the cosmos as opposed to identifying only with one’s local tribe.  Bilbo learns to get along with diverse peoples, such as dwarves and elves, without needing to change their ways.  There are examples of ‘cultural contamination’ in the hobbit.  Bilbo is presented with an elvish coat of armour and sword.  It is the natural order of things that cultures absorb elements from other cultures and these things become integrated into the borrowing culture.  For example, tea in England originally came from East Asia.  Two cosmopolitan principles are fallibilism and pluralism.  Fallibilism is recognising that you may be wrong without knowing it and being ready to learn from others.  There is the issue of being ready to listen to the other point of view or side and taking the effort to understand that view, as opposed to being focused entirely on getting one’s own point across.  Pluralism is accepting that in many areas of life there is more than one right answer or more than one way to skin a cat.   The principles do not require complete agreement but just tolerance, acceptance and perhaps appreciation.  Completely counter to the spirit of cosmopolitanism is imposing your ways on other people through the threat of violence, something that even God seems to do for he imposes one way of life (Christian or Islamic) on the threat of eternal torture in hell.  One suspects that God is a convenient figure to make imposition of one’s own ways more socially acceptable: “It is not me but God who commands this!” 

Living around different traditions helps make one more accepting and tolerant of them.  Conversation across traditions is okay but the object is not to persuade others but to bring people together according to the the philosopher Kwame Appiah author of Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers.  He expands conversation to include any form of interaction with another culture.  There is no need to get people to agree with you or to try to persuade people of your own values.  Question is does this apply to the value of cosmopolitanism?  Should we refrain from imposing this value on tribalists?  Should we not speak up about dodgy practices in other cultures such as child marriages and FGM?  Problem is bringing these subjects up is liable to cause divisions rather than bringing people together but sometimes maybe all that is required is a minimum standard of civility.  The thing to do would be to avoid extremism whether it be attacking atheists with cleavers as in Bangladesh or threatening visitors of mosques/temples with guns as in America.  It is not clear to me though that peaceful expression of one’s views should be discouraged.