Your detailed and thorough post due by Wednesday@MIDNIGHT for full credit (A). Partial credit (C) can be earned by posting late, which is better than a ZERO.
Remember, weekly blogging is worth 1/3 of your entire semester grade.
Be sure to communicate with Dr. W as needed - rob.williams@madriver.com.
Read and blog COSMOPOLITANISM, Chapters 5-6.
2) EVIDENCE: Post and number THREE specific observations from EACH CHAPTER of our reading(s) that supports your thesis.
Use 2-3 sentences for each observation, and combine direct quotations from the text (AUTHOR's LAST NAME, 27), with IYOW analysis.
3) QUESTION: Include in your post a SINGLE SPECIFIC question you'd ask the class based on our readings.
1) THESIS:
ReplyDeleteCh.5:
-Learning about one another’s differences, but not with the intent to change each other's minds, is important; morals and values are distinctly different concepts.
Ch.6:
-There are ways to connect with other cultures that are different than your own without making them out to be strangers because we don’t understand/ know about their side of things.
2) EVIDENCE:
Ch.5:
-“conversation doesn’t start with agreement on principles” (Appiah,69). People have different values and still agree morally. Values would be the reason for doing something and this can vary from person to person. “Conversation doesn’t have to lead to consensus about anything, especially not values; it’s enough that it helps people get used to one another” (Appiah, 85).
-Engaging with different people is important, not for the sake of arguing and changing another’s values, but for the sake of simply trying to understand their ideas. Appiah says, “Conversation is hardly guaranteed to lead to agreement about what to think and feel. Yet we go wrong if we think the point of conversation is to persuade” (Appiah, 84).
-Appiah doesn’t show favor to a universal set of human values that everyone can all agree upon, as well as, not agreeing with suggesting that everyone should trade in their local cultural identity for some transnational world citizenship. “our political coexistence, as subjects or citizens, depends on being able to agree about practices while disagreeing about their justification” (Appiah, 70). People can live harmoniously without agreeing with another on principles
Ch.6:
-Maybe there is no such thing as a ‘stranger’. The imaginary strangers may be those who we call strangers, but are actually not so strange after all. “Once we have found enough we share, there is further possibility that we will be able to enjoy discovering things we do not yet share” (Appiah, 97).
-There are a number of people in a culture that can connect with people of a different culture through means of a common idea, interest, or personality. “human societies have ended up having many deep things in common” (Appiah, 96).
- “You will find people everywhere who are kindly, sympathizing with others. But there are sociopaths and psychopaths scattered across the planet, too. In what sense are kindness and sympathy universal? The answer in each case is not that every human being has these traits or capacities. Rather they are present in every large enough group of our species; in particular, they are the statistical norm in every society” (Appiah, 95).
3) QUESTION:
When is the last time you reached outside of your comfort zone and went out of your way to talk to someone culturally different than you? How did it go?
THESIS)
ReplyDeleteChapter 5: It is possible for people to come to the same conclusions on their own, they can agree on what is right or what action to take for different reasons.
Chapter 6: no matter someone's background you can always find a common ground to relate to them with.
EVIDENCE)
Chapter 5:
- Kwame states that “we can live in harmony without agreeing on underlying values” and what he means by that is that people don't need to accept others values to live together in peace .
- “Who but someone in the grip of a terrible theory would want to insist on an agreement on principles before discussing which movie to go to” here he points out how silly it is to try and agree on every aspect of a decision when all that really matters is that you agree on the outcome.
- “Understanding one another may be hard; it can certainly be interesting. But it doesn’t require that we come to an agreement.” we don't need to have the same values to accept others, making an effort to understand others is all that matters
Chapter 6:
- Kwame says that “there’s just a great deal of everyday life that is utterly, humanly familiar.” and what he means is that no matter who you are there are core parts of being human that we all share.
- he backs this up by saying “Cross-cultural analysis reveals that there really are some basic mental traits that are universal” which means that no matter who you are you think in similar ways to other people and require the same things.
- from all this Kwame gathers that “the points of entry to cross-cultural conversations are things that are shared by those who are in the conversation.” meaning to find a common ground with whoever you are trying to understand.
QUESTION)
Cosmopolitanism is all about understanding other people and cultures, So are there any unique ways that we could encourage the understanding of other cultures in our society? Should we teach more about other cultures in school?
1) THESIS:
ReplyDeleteChapter 5: As opinions of other cultures change over time, Appiah explains that shared values are not needed to agree on end decisions.
Chapter 6: Despite our differences, we do share commonalities based on our human makeup and values.
2) EVIDENCE:
Chapter 5:
- Appiah reiterates the idea that agreement isn’t needed for conversation. “Conversation doesn’t start with agreement on principles,'' he explains (Appiah, 69). He also clarifies that issues can still be solved without agreeing on the values that build that decision.
- I also found it interesting how the author explains that people may see a foreign practice or decision as disturbing. This is just because it is an “unfamiliar practice”, but once it becomes more familiar, people may be more likely to understand it (Appiah, 73).
- Public opinions of controversial topics have changed over time. Take gay marriage for example, Appiah explains that “instead of thinking about the private activity of gay sex, many Americans started thinking about the public category of gay people” (Appiah, 77).
Chapter 6:
-As there are more discussions about issues in the world, many different voices come to the table. People use their history, culture, and personal beliefs to make decisions about certain topics, but not everyone is sure where they fit in because of our developing world culture. Appiah explains, “I feel both that I do and I don’t belong” (91). For someone like him, it may be hard to make decisions aligning with your home culture because you are a cosmopolitan and see many different views
- I like the comparisons Appiah brings about shared characteristics among different cultures. He explains that people share many similarities across the world, which can somewhat be attributed to the “machinery of the mind” (94). Due to this, he says, “cultures produce a great deal of variety, but also much that is the same” (96).
- In the same vein, this idea allows for easier communication between cultures because we do share so much. That said, “the cosmopolitan curiosity about other people does not have to begin by seeking in each encounter those traits that all humans share” (Appiah, 97). This commonality just allows us to better communicate and understand each other.
3) QUESTION: When was a time you were able to agree with someone else about an outcome, despite having completely different values and backgrounds?
Chapter 5 - Set values are not required for people to come to an agreement.
ReplyDeleteHere he gives an example of how American’s live alongside one another respecting the differences among them given that they don’t disrupt each others lifestyles. “So long as this settled pattern is not seriously disrupted, they do not worry over-much about whether their fellow citizens agree with them or their theories about how to live. ” ( Appiah, 141 (sorry the page numbers in my book are wrong) For example I can live a vegan lifestyle by a neighbor that doesn’t, they openly cook meat out on their BBQ, I can either accept that and respect their choices or come on over there and make a scene, but I probably won’t.
Short and blunt, but this quote talks in reference to how despite there being groups of people that outright dislike LGBT people, they still live amongst them giving them more and more respect as time goes on whether they approve of homosexuality or not “people got used to lesbians and gay people.” (Appiah, 151)
“I’ve said we can live in harmony without agreeing on underlying values ” (Appiah, 151) Another quote playing into how homophobic people still live alongside homosexuals in harmony (at least in some places and is slowly getting better around the world )
Chapter 6 - Despite how different people can be from each other, there will always be some common ground between them.
“Anywhere you travel in the world you can find ceremonies such as these, many of them, like these, rooted in centuries-old traditions. But you will also find everywhere—and this is something new—many intimate connections with places far away: Washington, Moscow, Mexico City, Beijing. ” (Appiah, 167) We connect through similarities in what we do, how we do them might not be the same, but despite that we still recognize familiarities/similarities.
“Finally, there’s just a great deal of everyday life that is utterly, humanly familiar.” (Appiah 174) When talking about his home in Ghana and the United states he goes into detail about the differences between the two but ends on this quote and continues on about how in the end we all do the same things such as eating, finding love, marrying, etc.
“the points of entry to cross-cultural conversations are things that are shared by those who are in the conversation.” (Appiah, 179) Again, no matter where you are from/ how different you are, you can always find some similarity whether it being a dietary habit, a hobby, etc.
Q: What are we to do about people who simply refuse to live harmoniously with those alongside them? Is it everyone else who is obligated to accept that about the person and try to live among them anyway?
1) Thesis
ReplyDeleteChapter 5: The only way to come to understand the differences between cultures is to engage in conversation and exchange ideas/values.
Chapter 6: While individuals may have differing cultures and backgrounds there is still ultimately a common ground which ultimately.
2)Evidence
Chapter 5:
“We can live together without agreeing on what the values are that make it good to live together; we can agree about what to do in most cases, without agreeing about why it is right.” (Appiah, 71). A good example of this is the United States Constitutional which can be equated to a form of agreements. Individuals constantly debate the meaning behind the same amendments, often never coming to a general consensus. However it is still possible to coexist with one another, without agreeing about the meaning of certain values.
“Or consider another example: in much of Europe and North America, in places where a generation ago homosexuals were social outcasts and homosexual acts were illegal, lesbian and gay couples are increasingly being recognized....”(Appiah, 77). Over time individuals became more accustomed to those within the LGBT community, and this was only achieved through the interactions between them.
Another example of this would be the rise of women's rights, Appiah stated “ Still the vast majority of Westerners would be appalled at the idea of trying to force women back into these rules. Arguments mattered for the women who made the women’s movement and the men who responded to them.” (Appiah, 77). As women's rights activists continued to present their arguments individuals began to be more accustomed to to the ideas.
Chapter 6:
“ Color language is a good example of the way in which basic features of most normal people the way our retinas and visual cortexes work, and the inbuilt capacity for learning a language”. (Appiah, 96). Even if individuals share different backgrounds and values, ultimately these same individuals share the same basic features.
“Cross-cultural analysis reveals that there really are some basic mental traits that are universal in the sense that they’re normal everywhere. It has also confirmed, for that matter, that some unusual traits the incapacity to make sense of other people that we call autism are found in every human population too.” (Appiah, 96). Regardless of nationality or culture individuals possess the same mental traits. Also there are unusual traits which can be found in every culture regardless of their values or beliefs.
“When two normal people meet, they often share not only what all normal human beings share but also much else. This is one result of the constant contact across societies produced by our traveling habits and the trade in goods, both physical and symbolic.” (Appiah, 97). Individuals no matter their background or experiences share these basic traits with one another.
3)Question
What could be a way to encourage conversation and the exchange of ideas between different cultural groups?
Chapter 5: It is possible to come to a common conclusion without shared values
ReplyDeleteEvidence
1)An example of a common conclusion not meaning too much for a society. Americans do have shared values that "live together in amity",but the reason that they do have shared values does not mean that they are living successfully because of it (Page 71).
2) While we do not need to have a shared value, you can still get to know about people coming from different perspectives or places. Appiah states this through the acceptance of homosexual people, before people use to think of them being bad through the perspective of "Gay sex". However by learning more about them, people were able to shift the perspective to being "gay people", while the act of sex may be bad for some people, they can not deny respect of them being human (Page 77-78).
3)Talking with others is not meant to convince and to come to a common conclusion. According to Appiah, "Conversation is hardly guaranteed to lead to an agreement" but if you think that it is supposed to, thats where you already making a mistake, we are supposed to learn from the differences (Page 84).
Chapter 6: No matter how many differences there may be between people, there will be some common elements between them
1)Not everyone is going to have some of the same universal traits, such as the capability to see color or having the capability to be kind. Some people are blind and some people go out to harm others, however, the fact that so many people are within groups of our species, "they are a statistical norm in every society" (Page 95).
2). "Cross cultural analysis reveals that there really are some basic mental traits that are universal". This means that these basic traits are normal everywhere, this leads to be true with unusual traits (Page 96)
3). Individuals when they meet, often share traits with each other too. "They often share not only what all normal human beings share but also much else", such as trade in goods. (Page 97)
Question:
Are people who refuse to accept one another, an outlier within a global society?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteChapter #5:
ReplyDelete1) We can live together without agreeing on everything or anything in its entirety.
2) (a) We can agree on what to do but still disagree as to why we should do it. “Americans share a willingness to be governed by the system set out in the U.S. Constitution. But that does not require anyone to agree to any particular claims or values” (Appiah 70).
(b) We rarely have judgements on why we do something until after it has been done and we have been made to question it. “Our efforts to justify what we have done–or what we plan to do–are typically made up after the event, rationalizations of what we have decided intuitively. And a good deal of what we intuitively take to be right, we take to be right just because it is what we are used to” (Appiah 72).
(c) We can talk about our values and how they differ from another person’s values without declaring one’s values right or wrong over another. “Conversation doesn’t have to lead to consensus about anything, especially not values; it’s enough that it helps people get used to one another (Appiah 85).
Chapter #6:
1) While our shared human makeup/biology allows us to share interests with one another, it also allows us to understand the unique interests among us.
2) (a) We have the capacity to understand the differences between those close to us and those further away. “Most of the time, once someone has translated the language you don’t know or explained some little unfamiliar symbol or custom, you’ll have no more (and, of course, no less) trouble understanding why they do what they do than you do making sense of your neighbors back home (Appiah 94).
(b) Our interconnected 21st century world allows us to share more than just biology with other humans across the world. “This is one result of the constant contact across societies produced by our traveling habits and trade in goods, both physical and symbolic, that now connects us all” (Appiah 97)
(c) We don’t have to share everything in common with the people we are interacting with only a few things. “The points of entry to cross-cultural conversations are things that are share by those in the conversation. They do not need to be universal; all they need to be is what these particular people have in common” (Appiah 97).
3) Is accepting someone’s right to have different values the same as truly accepting their different values as legitimate?
Chapter 5:
ReplyDeleteThesis: Differing values doesn’t matter for living together peacefully.
Evidence:
1. “We can live together without agreeing on what the values are that make it good to live together; we can agree about what to do in most cases, without agreeing about why it is right” (Appiah 71). Even when values differ from person-to-person, we can normally agree on generic standards on right and wrong. It doesn’t matter why each person feels it to be right, it just matters that it is agreed to be right.
2. Having matching values can actually bring problems in fact: “Warring parties are seldom at odds because they have clashing conceptions of “the good.” On the contrary, conflict arises most often when two peoples have identified the same things as good”(Appiah 78). The example Appiah goes on to take about is that Jews and Muslims both have high respect for Jerusalem, and thus want control over it and fight for it. This shows that just having the same values doesn’t necessarily mean there will be peace.
3. “Conversation doesn’t have to lead to consensus about anything, especially not values; it’s enough that it helps people get used to one another”(Appiah 85). Appiah explains here that conversation isn’t about coming to the same conclusion as the other sides, it is about understanding them. Through understanding is when living together peacefully becomes possibility.
Chapter 6:
Thesis: There is always some similarities between people, making it possible to come to understanding each other.
Evidence:
1. “When two normal people meet, they often share not only what all normal human beings share but also much else” (Appiah 97). Conversations don’t just revolve around universal similarities, but other topics that the participants find important to themselves. When there is a similarity between interests, a connection is born.
2. “the points of entry to cross-cultural conversations are things that are shared by those who are in the conversation. They do not need to be universal; all they need to be is what these particular people have in common” (Appiah 97). What Appiah is saying here is: to have a conversation, it doesn’t matter what the rest of the world thinks about a topic, just as long as the ones in the conversation are on the same page. Interests don’t have to be universal, there can be connections that happen on individual occurrences.
3. Coming into contact with people of different backgrounds allows us to understand their culture more than if there was never an interaction. “But the great lesson of anthropology is that when a stranger is no longer imaginary, but real and present, sharing a human social life, you may like or dislike him, you may agree or disagree; but if it is what you both want, you can make sense of each other in the end” (Appiah 99). When we interact with someone from a differing lifestyle or culture, it is easier to start to understand their lifestyle and values, if we choose to.
Question:
What are some of the outcomes when we don't try to understand other people and their cultures?
Chapter 5
ReplyDeleteAgreements and disagreements based on values.
“Value language helps shape common responses of thought, action, and feeling. But when the issue is what to do, differences in what we think and feel can fall away.”(Appiah, 70)
“When we offer judgments, after all, it’s rarely because we have applied well-thought out principles to a set of facts and deduced an answer.”(Appiah,72) Our efforts to justify what we have done or what we plan to do are typically made up after the event.
“But I have learned in a life of university teaching and research that even the cleverest people are not easily shifted by reason alone and that can be true even in the most cerebral realms.”(Appaih, 84)
What is the value he sees in cross cultural conversation?
Chapter 6
People being from multiple “worlds”, different cultures, but maintaining some ability to understand each other.
“And again like many, when I am there I feel both that I do and that I don't belong. At moments like the one at the palace, I know what is happening, and people know who I am. So, in one sense, I fit it.”(Appiah,91)
“Since most people don't have the status, they need to find someone, a patron who does.”(Appiah,92) He explained that people asking one for something is the act of inviting someone to be your patron. It's a way of indicating respect.
“The points of energy to cross cultural conversations are things that are shared by those who are in the conversation”(Appiah,97) Its also the simple things that are found to be in common.
Finding similarities in values is looked upon as connecting with other cultures, Why are the differences looked at negatively? In each culture there is the similarities and the differences yet differences are seen as a conversation breaker, How come?
Fine blogging here, team HRR!
ReplyDeleteAll posts below this line = C/LATE.
Dr. Rob
Ch. 5 Thesis: When it comes to different viewpoints on gay marriage, genital mutilation, and other hot button topics, it is often time and conversation that brings about change.
ReplyDeleteCh. 5 evidence:
“Reasoning – by which I mean the public act of exchanging stated justifications – comes in not when we are going on in the usual way, but when we are thinking about change. And when it comes to change, what moves people is often not an argument from a principle, not a long discussion about values, but just a gradually acquired new way of seeing things.” (pg. 73)
“What makes these conflicts so intense is that they are battles over the meaning of the same values, not that they oppose one value, held exclusively by one side, with another, held exclusively by their antagonists. It is, in part, because we have shared horizons of meaning, because these are debates between people who share so many other values and so much else in the way of belief and of habit, that they are as sharp and as painful as they are.” (pg. 81)
“Yet we go wrong if we think the point of conversation is to persuade, and imagine it proceeding as a debate, in which points are scored for the Proposition and the Opposition. […] Conversations begin with the sort of imaginative engagement you get when you read a novel or watch a movie attend to a work of art that speaks from some place other than your own. […] Conversation doesn’t have to lead to consensus about anything, especially not values; it’s enough that it helps people get used to one another” (pg. 85)
Ch. 6 thesis: Communication within cultures compared to others can be mystifying but understandable, human traits can seem universal around the globe and are statistical, but finding common ground with individuals or entire societies is what brings us together and makes us form new paths.
Ch. 6 evidence:
“To understand these constant demands, you have to understand something about life in Ghana. It is true now, as it were true one and two and three centuries ago, that success in life depends on being enmeshed in a web of relationships. To get things done – to get a driver’s license, a passport, a building permit, a job – you need to be someone or know someone with the social standing to work your will. Since most people don’t have that status, they need to find someone – a patron – who does. In a society like this, to ask someone for something is to invite him to become your patron.” (pg. 92)
“You will find people everywhere who are kindly, sympathizing with others. But there are sociopaths and psychopaths scattered across the planet, too. In what sense are kindness and sympathy universal? The answer in each case is not that every human being has these traits or capacities. Rather, they are present in every large enough group of our species; in particular, they are the statistical norm in every society.” (pg. 95)
“The conclusion is obvious enough: the points of entry to cross-cultural conversations are things that are shared by those who are in the conversation. They do not need to be universal; all they need to be is what these particular people have in common. Once we have found enough we share, there is the further possibility that we will be able to enjoy discovering things we do not yet share. That is one of the payoffs of cosmopolitan curiosity. We can learn from one another; or we can simply be intrigued by alternative ways of thinking, feeling, and acting.” (pg. 97)
Question: Is anyone truly unique?
Chapter 5
ReplyDeleteThesis: As human beings we can learn from one another without sharing the same values, and we can live and come to the same conclusion without agreeing upon the right way to do something.
Evidence:
Appiah stated that “there is no agreed-upon answer -- and the point is there doesn’t need to be” (71). In order to get along with one another we don’t need to agree on the same ideas or values. It’s important to understand where others are coming from.
“What comes to change, what moves people is often not an argument from a principle, not a long discussion about values, but just a gradually acquired new way of seeing things” (73). I found this quote to be really interesting because we value and learn from the people who are closest to us. If we surround ourselves with the same people our whole life we will most likely never see anything different, but if we move out of our comfort zone then we may start to see things in a different perspective.
“Conversation doesn’t have to lead to consensus about anything, especially not values; its enough that it helps people get used to one another” (85). Being able to have conversations and learn from others is really important to our humanity. It allows us to have more empathy than sympathy, when we understand and learn about others.
Chapter 6
Thesis: Although there are many different cultures, by having conversation we may see that we have more similarities than we might think.
Evidence:
“Cultures produce a great deal of variety, but also much that is the same” (96). Cultures have many different values and traditions within in but if we look closer many of those hold a deeper meaning that may make them more similar.
I really liked this quote from Appiah, “we can learn from one another; or we can simply be intrigued by alternative ways of thinking, feeling, and acting” (97). I completely agree with the fact that we may not learn anything or even necessarily agree with others but we can certainly be in “aw” of how they see or do things.
“When the stranger is no longer imaginary, but real and present, sharing a human social life, you may like or dislike him, you may agree or disagree, but, if it is what you both want you can make sense of each other in the end” (99). Looking past all forms of media and being in a real space with someone that has a different background, race, religion, etc. it can be so eye opening to just be in that moment and if you both are willing to learn from each other then that's all that matters.
Question:
Do you ever catch yourself trying to convince someone your point of view? What are ways you can have these open conversations, that don’t lead to agree upon ideas/values?
Thesis
ReplyDeleteChapter 5: Although it is good to know others values but it is not exental to coming to an agreement, we can agree on things but also have different opinions and views.
Chapter 6: people are very different from one another so is society from society, but we can still work well together we just need to be able to find common ground on which we all agree on one thing.
Evidence
Chapter 5:
“Indeed, our political coexistence, as subjects or citizens, depends on being able to agree about practices while disagreeing about their justification”(Pg 70, Appiah). Yes citizens should come to one agreement on things but it doesn't mean we should all have the same reasons for agreeing on what is being agreed on.
“But they certainly don’t live together successfully because they have a shared theory of value or a shared story as to how to bring “their” values to bear in each case”(Pg 71, Appiah). Even from house to house we can come to one agreement on things but each person can have very different views and beliefs.
“Our efforts to justify what we have done—or what we plan to do—are typically made up after the event, rationalizations of what we have decided intuitively”(Pg 72, Appiah). Because not everyone agrees on everything together when we do something someone we have respect for and or care about how they view us we tend to justify what we have done and why we did it.
Chapter 6:
“On the other hand, there are things in Kumasi that remind me constantly that this is no longer where I live. I find I am irritated for example, by the slow pace of things, by the unreliability of services”(Pg 91, Appiah). As time passes people evolve and make changes people who are stuck in there ways might have a hard time adapting to the change but they are still accepted into their society.
“It is true now, as it was true one and two and three centuries ago, that success in life depends on being enmeshed in a web of relationships”(Pg 92, Appiah). As we are all different from one another this means we all have something different to bring to the table this is how we create a successful society.
“Most of the time, once someone has translated the language you don’t know, or explained some little unfamiliar symbol or custom, you’ll have no more (and, of course, no less) trouble understanding why they do what they do than you do making sense of your neighbors back home” (Pg 94, Appiah). Many of us miss understand each other's ways because of language barriers, if we understood each other's language it would give us a better understanding of why we do what we do.
Question:If there was better communication and understandings through out societies would there be a stop to wars?
Thesis 5: Political coexistence for citizens allows individuals to agree on practices while disagreeing on justification.
ReplyDelete"There is no agreed-upon answer- and the point is there doesn't need to be. We can live together without agreeing on what the values are that make it good to life together; we can agree about what to do in most cases, without agreeing about why it is right." (71)
"So long as this settled pattern is not seriously disrupted, they do not worry over-much about whether their fellow citizens agree with them or their theories about to to live." (71)
"Our efforts to justify what we have done-or what we plan to do-typically made up after the event, rationalization of what we have decided intuitively. And a good deal of what we intuitively take to be right, we take to be right just because it is what we are used to." (72)
Thesis 6: Similarities can be found within different cultures when the time is taken to communicate about them.
ReplyDelete"...I live long way away from the hot of my earliest memories. Like many, I return there from time to time, to visit family and friends. And, again like many, when I am there I feel both that I do and that I don't belong. At moment like the one at the place, I know what is happening, and people know who I am. So, in one sense, I fit in. Nothing surprised me. I know how to behave."(90-91)
"Cross-cultural analysis reveals that there really are some basic mental traits that are universal-in the sense that they're normal everywhere. It has also confirmed, for that matter, that some unusual traits- the incapacity to make sense of other people that we call autism- are found in every human population too."(96)
"...all they need to be is what these particular people have in common. Once we have found enough we share, there is the further possibility that we will be able to enjoy discovering things we do not yet share." (97)