John Coetzee and rational cosmopolitanism

pp. 43-68

in: Katherine Hallemeier, J. M. Coetzee and the limits of cosmopolitanism, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013

Abstract

I have defined rational cosmopolitanism as cosmopolitanism that sees, in the cultivation of sympathy for others, the potential for yielding a heightened sense of transnational relationship and obligation, such as would arguably abet the felicitous negotiation of global issues in extant international institutions: rational cosmopolitanism imagines that "citizens of the world" can move toward more perfect understanding of their relationships with others through the practice of sympathy. Sympathy within rational cosmopolitanism, therefore, is a means to an end: it is an individual capacity that provides a basis for "reasonable" consensus building that aims to be equitable and just. Insofar as reading potentially extends one's capacity for sympathy, it has been suggested—most notably by Martha C. Nussbaum—that a literary education can nurture a rational cosmopolitan outlook that values the ideal of an equal humanity. At the same time, critics such as Homi Bhabha and Bruce Robbins have challenged Nussbaum's contention that it is "reasonable" for the cosmopolitan to pursue the work that Adam Smith assigns to God alone: care for the happiness of "all rational and sensible beings' (Smith 238).