Consider the example of someone making a symmetric argument against cosmopolitanism:
It’s quite remarkable how we hold ideas to different standards in different contexts. Imagine, for instance, a US politician that openly endorses caring about all humans equally regardless of where they are located . Her opponents would immediately attack the worst implications: “So you would prefer money that would go to local schools and homeless shelters be sent overseas to foreign countries?” The politician, being honest, says yes, and that’s the end of her career.
I think we should have some deference to commonsensical intuitions and pluralist beliefs (narrowly construed), but it will likely be a mistake to give those perspectives significant deference.
Consider the example of someone making a symmetric argument against cosmopolitanism:
I think we should have some deference to commonsensical intuitions and pluralist beliefs (narrowly construed), but it will likely be a mistake to give those perspectives significant deference.