Summary Kwame Anthony Appiah Making Conversation

One generation after another passes by with new ways of thinking and understanding attached to each of them, one never being exactly the same as the one before or after it. In Kwame Anthony Appiah’s articles, “Making Conversation” and “The Primacy of Practice”, he goes into great depth over the concept of conversation being the most critical component of differences being pushed aside, with global-wide acceptance and understanding attached to it. In not only today’s society but also past society’s, people have always looked at others of different religions and cultures in a way of confusion and disgust because of the things they do differently from them. This issue has lead to many problems throughout the world because most do not take the
time to sit down and let someone explain why they are the way they are and to learn to understand that they are not like you and you need to accept them for this and coexist. People seeing eye-to-eye is one of the hardest things to achieve due to so many factors. Appiah in his article tries to wrap our mind around the thought that conversation is this almighty key that opens the door to all acceptance; however, there are so many issues that come along with it that make it almost impossible for it to truly happen such as social norms, beliefs and values, but also the fact that Appiah was more fortunate than most. Societies develop and learn what they know based off the previous generations that have passed on the norms to them. Therefore, people do things out of habitat or because they were taught certain ways and do not see why what they are doing is wrong. For example, child beating; if you are brought up where spanking is normal and often than you will end up spanking your kid, but people in societies that do not grow up this way will see it as a crime and abuse. “I don’t say that we can’t change minds, but the reasons we exchange in our conversations will seldom do much to persuade others who do not share our fundamental evaluative judgments already” (Appiah 75). Likewise, peoples rationalizations are there’s and even if you think you are right and they are wrong, the tables can be turned and they could think something your society does is wrong. If Appiah wants everyone to accept people without having to agree on why they are agreeing, how can this occur? How can people give up the freedom of their right to morals and viewpoints? It is something that would demean society as a whole and make it a place where even more immense issues can occur because people will feel uneasy about accepting someone just to accept them, not having any true reason too. Another viewpoint over the topic of societal norms would be the discussion over female genital cutting. Those for it will see it as making them aesthetically more beautiful and is making them into adult. Others can see it as demeaning women and cause potential risks. It is something that has been practiced for however long in that certain place and seen as playing a huge role in women’s lives; so, who are you to go into a place you are not affiliated with and tell someone to stop doing something just because you are not for it? If anything it will only cause more complications to be developed between two or more sides and dislike for one another to emerge. Selfishness is one of the worst traits to carry on your shoulders, but it could be one of the best and it is something a lot of people seem to not care about expressing. Society has made a further adaptation towards the homosexual community and there really has been much progress. People now, mainly the present generation who grew up with it being more acceptable, do not see it as bad as previous generations, and have aloud for it to be expressed more publicly and even some states have aloud for gay marriage to be legal. Appiah states, “This is true despite the continued opposition of major religious groups and a significant and persisting undercurrent of social disapproval”(Appiah 78). Those in full devotion to their religion will do anything to make sure that they follow it; likewise, most religions go against gay marriage, seeing it as immoral and inhuman. They believe that there must be opposite sex attraction for it to be pure and healthy. Therefore, they are so tied down to their beliefs that they verbally assault homosexuals trying to dehumanize them and make them feel bad about themselves. No matter what, they will not hear them out about their reasons towards their decision and simply give them the cold shoulder. It is truly disgusting to see such a thing, but it is the way some people are and they have not changed since the beginning of time. Appiah can see this topic as progress, but conversation will not budge certain people. Even though it can be true that we can live together without agreeing on values, it is the fact that those who are attached so strongly to their values will never stop arguing with those against them, creating a constant debate; therefore conversation really is doing nothing besides heating the fire.
“Furthermore, no sane person on either side thinks that saving human lives or allowing people to medical autonomy is the only thing that matters” (Appiah 80). Yes, people who are pro-life and pro-choice do understand the fundamentals of the overall disagreement, but that does not mean they will not butt heads repeatedly. Just because they respect each other’s viewpoints does not mean that one side will not settle until they have reached full success. In their minds they only see their viewpoint of the topic as being “right”. Having such a strong side over a party that has an equally strong side over the same subject makes the debate that more vicious because they put so much emotion and dedication into it and will not care about anything the other has to say. What also makes this topic different is the fact that every generation develops their own values, the way they see things and think things should be. I grew up as a child listening to what my parents said, but as I got older I started questioning things they told me and eventually it has come to me seeing different sides of things compared to them. Likewise, it is nearly impossible to undermine the fact that as new generations arise, they too will see things in a different light and will object to what others tell them to be
true.
Appiah as a child was more fortunate than most because he was able to grow up in a society of great diversity. Most people cannot say that every occupation/role in society offered where they live is basically carried out by a different ethnicity for each role. Therefore, this is truly his strongest argument for this whole article he has written because he can see how it works so simply, but such a large portion of the world cannot relate to him and will think differently. If a Chinese man came into a society of all African Americans, he would most likely be discriminated against because he is nothing like them. Therefore, Appiah wants us to realize that, “Cosmopolitanism is an adventure and an ideal: But you can’t have any respect for human diversity and expect everyone to become cosmopolitan” (Appiah 72). It is harsh, but it is the reality of the world because the human race is so judgmental and likes to stick to their day-to-day lives with little change; you cannot force anything upon someone. Even though worldwide acceptance is a great thing, people have the right to keep to themselves.
Appiah’s goal of overcoming worldwide acceptance is something a lot of people would be for because it would make society as a whole much more peaceful. Yes, there are many like Appiah, but there are not enough and there are to many voids in this subject that makes it nearly impossible for it to come into full effect. Conversation is tricky seeing how it can be very helpful in some ways and then it can destroy so much. Those who are so tied down to societal norms, beliefs, values, and fear of the unknown are the major factors halting this potential life-changing goal. Nonetheless, the impact of new generational minds being shaped around when they come into society and then what they end up valuing is just as detrimental to this claim of conversation being so powerful.