Refine
Year of publication
- 2014 (204) (remove)
Document Type
- Report (119)
- Article (29)
- Review (14)
- Part of Periodical (13)
- Contribution to a Periodical (8)
- Book (7)
- Working Paper (6)
- Doctoral Thesis (3)
- Diploma Thesis (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (204) (remove)
Keywords
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (204) (remove)
This paper analyzes two contemporary, „third-generation“ perspectives within critical theory - Nancy Fraser’s and Axel Honneth’s - with the aim of examining the degree to which the two authors succeed in grounding the normative criteria of social critique in the perspectives of ’ordinary’ social actors, as opposed to speculative social theory. To that end, the author focuses on the influential debate between Fraser and Honneth Redistribution or Recognition? which concerns the appropriate normative foundations of a „post-metaphysical“ critical theory, and attempts to reconstruct the fundamental 29 disagreements between Fraser and Honneth over the meaning and tasks of critical theory. The author concludes that both critical theorists ultimately secure the normative foundations of critique through substantive theorizations of the social, which frame the two authors’ „reconstructions“ of the normativity of everyday social action, but argues that post-metaphysical critical theory does not have to abandon comprehensive social theory in order to be epistmologically „non-authoritarian“.
Em alguns de seus trabalhos Talcott Parsons descreveu o estabelecimento das sociedades modernas como um processo de diferenciação de diversas esferas de reconhecimento recíproco. Neste texto eu uso a teoria social do reconhecimento de Parsons para examinar características de conflitos sociais recentes. Começo expondo a descrição que Parsons fez das lutas por reconhecimento ocorridas nas sociedades altamente industrializadas de sua época. Depois tomo a concepção de Parsons sobre conflitos por reconhecimento normativamente orientados para indicar tendências que levaram a uma gradual erosão das estruturas de pacificação social postuladas por Parsons nas últimas décadas do século 20. Descrevo as consequências iniciais dessa desintegração como uma “barbarização” dos conflitos sociais. Por barbarizado entendo um estágio da sociedade em que as lutas por reconhecimento social escalaram e se tornaram anômicas, uma vez que não podem mais ser resolvidas nas esferas sistêmicas estabelecidas de negociação. Este texto revela a importância do conceito de reconhecimento para a teoria social ao acompanhar Parsons na análise de transformações estruturais que atualmente emergem em resposta a conflitos sociais. Resumo do editor.
For more than two decades, the National Planning Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences (NPOPSS) has been managing official funding of social science research in China under the orbit of the Communist Party of China’s (CPC) propaganda system. By focusing on “Major Projects”, the most prestigious and well-funded program initiated by the NPOPSS in 2004, this contribution outlines the political and institutional ramifications of this line of official funding and attempts to identify larger shifts during the past decade in the “ideologics” of official social science research funding – the changing ideological circumscriptions of research agendas in the more narrow sense of echoing party theory and rhetoric and – in the broader sense – of adapting to an increasingly dominant official discourse of cultural and national self-assertion. To conclude, this article offers reflections on the potential repercussions of these shifts for international academic collaboration.
Die Intervention Russlands auf der Krim im März dieses Jahres und die derzeitige Situation in der Ostukraine haben zu einer Diskussion darüber geführt, ob es sich hierbei um einen „Fall für die Schutzverantwortung“ handelt. Als zentrales Argument für sein Eingreifen führt Russland schließlich den Schutz bedrohter russischer Zivilisten an. In einem Gastbeitrag erläutert Roland Harris, warum die Intervention nicht mit dem Schutz der Menschenrechte der ethnischen Russen rechtfertigt werden kann.
In der konstruktivistischen Normentheorie kommt man nicht umher sich mit Praktiken wie Framing und Grafting zu beschäftigen, wenn man die Entstehung einer Norm untersucht. Die Norm der internationalen Schutzverantwortung zeigt, dass auch eine bereits anerkannte Norm immer noch umstritten sein kann. Diplomaten und Aktivisten greifen daher weiterhin auf Framing und Grafting zurück, um Skeptiker von ihrem Normverständnis zu überzeugen. Wie das aussieht möchte ich anhand von Aussagen einiger meiner Interviewpartner für ein Projekt über die Entwicklung humanitärer Schutznormen illustrieren.
This note offers reflections on qualified market access (QMA) - the practice of linking trade agreements to values such as human rights, labour standards, or environmental protection. This idea has been suggested by political theorists as a way of fulfilling our duties to the global poor and of making the global economic system more just, and it has influenced a number of concrete policies, such as European Union (EU) trade policies. Yet, in order to assess its merits tout court, different perspectives and disciplines need to be brought together, such as international law, economics, political science, and philosophy. It is also worth reflecting on existing practices, such as those of the EU. This note summarises some insights about QMA by drawing such research together and considers the areas in which further research is needed, whilst reflecting also on the merits of interdisciplinary exchanges on such topics.
Dass das Recht auf körperliche Unversehrtheit sehr ungleich verwirklicht ist,liegt völlig auf der Hand. Männer kommen zwar eher in gewaltsamenKonflikten ums Leben, jedoch wird Vergewaltigung als Kriegswaffe in denallermeisten Konflikten auf die eine oder andere Art und zumeist gegenFrauen eingesetzt. Daher fand dieses Jahr zum ersten Mal (!) in London eineinternationale Konferenz zu dem Thema statt...
A recent trend in international development circles is "New Institutionalism". In a slogan, the idea is just that good institutions matter. The slogan itself is so innocuous as to be hardly worth comment. But the push to improve institutional quality has the potential to have a much less innocuous impact on aid efforts and other aspects of international development. This paper provides a critical introduction to some of the literature on institutional quality. It looks, in particular, at an argument for the conclusion that making aid conditional on good institutional quality will promote development by reducing poverty. This paper suggests that there is little theoretical or empirical evidence that this kind of conditionality is good for the poor.
Wo sind bloß die Ukrainer?
(2014)