In both Munoz and Marantz, they discuss the ways that communication in general—and naming in particular—highlight the problems one faces when trying to understand his or her place in a community. In Munoz, “Ricardo” becomes “Rick” or “Richard;” in Marantz, “Adarsh” becomes “Adam.” There is the need to belong, and yet, at the same time a conflict over who and what one is. Apiah proposes the term “cosmopolitanism” as a solution to how we might be able to cope with a world is increasing global and fraught with tension s between dominant and subordinate forces. Central to this idea is what Apiah calls “conversation” and this is the starting point for your next essay. Please consider this question.
What role does “conversation” play in Munoz and Marantz—and how might it application help one to better understand the roles that community and identity play in everyday life?
Here are some suggestions.
a. How does a name begin a “conversation” that in turn would help one to recognize the role of cosmopolitanism in present day culture? How do the conversations in Munoz and Marantz suggest that there are challenges which Appiah has not fully explored in his essay?
b. In Appiah’s essay, he mentions George Eliot’s forgotten masterpiece Daniel Deronda. How does his life become an example of what is cosmopolitan—and what might the people in Munoz and Marantz learn from him?
c. In “The Primacy of Practice” Appiah presents particular concepts that he examines at some length—“Local Agreements,” “Changing our Minds,” “Fighting for the Good,” “Winners and Losers.” How do these terms help you as a reader to further appreciate the need for “conversation” in Munoz and Marantz?
d. What connection might exist between assimilation and —and how do the essays by Munoz and Marantz indicate that perhaps it is not that easy to overcome the boundaries that cosmopolitanism challenges?

Use the order calculator below and get ordering with now! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.

Free Quote