Wer muss draußen bleiben?

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.1515/dzph-2022-0029
R. Jaster, G. Keil
{"title":"Wer muss draußen bleiben?","authors":"R. Jaster, G. Keil","doi":"10.1515/dzph-2022-0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Special Focus on invitation policy at universities contains a target article by Romy Jaster and Geert Keil, five commentaries, and a response. The question under discussion is what disqualifies a person from being invited to speak at a university. On liberal, Millian approaches, the epistemic benefits of free speech preclude no-platforming policies. More restrictive approaches demand the exclusion of speakers who are considered racist or otherwise hostile against marginalized groups. Jaster and Keil take a virtue-based approach to invitation policy: A person is ineligible as a speaker if she exhibits specific intellectual vices that are detrimental to the pursuit of truth, the university’s raison d’être. The five critics raise various concerns. Birgit Recki deems the virtue-based approach too restrictive: It is prone to exclude some speakers who make intellectually stimulating contributions. Eva von Redecker and Daniel Loick deem the criterion too permissive: It allows for contributions that should have no place on campus. Dieter Schönecker and Maria-Sibylla Lotter object that the approach is silent on all recent actual cases of ‘cancelling’ at universities. In their response, Jaster and Keil address these concerns and clarify their position.","PeriodicalId":54099,"journal":{"name":"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE","volume":"70 1","pages":"474 - 491"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/dzph-2022-0029","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The Special Focus on invitation policy at universities contains a target article by Romy Jaster and Geert Keil, five commentaries, and a response. The question under discussion is what disqualifies a person from being invited to speak at a university. On liberal, Millian approaches, the epistemic benefits of free speech preclude no-platforming policies. More restrictive approaches demand the exclusion of speakers who are considered racist or otherwise hostile against marginalized groups. Jaster and Keil take a virtue-based approach to invitation policy: A person is ineligible as a speaker if she exhibits specific intellectual vices that are detrimental to the pursuit of truth, the university’s raison d’être. The five critics raise various concerns. Birgit Recki deems the virtue-based approach too restrictive: It is prone to exclude some speakers who make intellectually stimulating contributions. Eva von Redecker and Daniel Loick deem the criterion too permissive: It allows for contributions that should have no place on campus. Dieter Schönecker and Maria-Sibylla Lotter object that the approach is silent on all recent actual cases of ‘cancelling’ at universities. In their response, Jaster and Keil address these concerns and clarify their position.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
谁需要待在外面?
摘要《对大学邀请政策的特别关注》包含Romy Jaster和Geert Keil的一篇目标文章、五篇评论和一篇回应。正在讨论的问题是,是什么使一个人失去了在大学演讲的资格。在自由主义、米利安主义的方法中,言论自由的认识利益排除了无平台化政策。更具限制性的做法要求将被视为种族主义者或对边缘化群体怀有敌意的发言者排除在外。Jaster和Keil对邀请政策采取了基于美德的方法:如果一个人表现出不利于追求真理的特定智力缺陷,即大学存在的理由,那么她就没有资格成为演讲者。五位评论家提出了各种各样的担忧。Birgit Recki认为基于美德的方法限制性太强:它倾向于排除一些在智力上做出激励贡献的演讲者。Eva von Redecker和Daniel Loick认为这一标准过于宽松:它允许在校园里没有立足之地的捐款。Dieter Schönecker和Maria Sibylla Lotter反对这种做法对最近所有大学“取消”的实际案例保持沉默。Jaster和Keil在答复中谈到了这些关切并阐明了他们的立场。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
50.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Als offenes Diskussionsforum fördert die Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie den schulübergreifenden Dialog und die Kommunikation zwischen den philosophischen Kulturen. Vorrangig erscheinen Arbeiten, die aktiv in die moderne internationale philosophische Diskussion eingreifen und neue Denkansätze für sie liefern. Neben Fachaufsätzen und Essays, Interviews und Symposien publiziert die Zeitschrift Funde aus philosophischen Archiven, Diskussionen sowie Buchkritiken.
期刊最新文献
Selbstkritische Philosophiegeschichtsschreibung als Arbeit am Kanon Nochmals zu Mendelssohn, Kant und dem ontologischen Gottesbeweis Freiheit neu vorstellen: menschliches Handlungsvermögen in Zeiten der ökologischen Katastrophe Nachruf auf Dieter Henrich Darf die Ukraine kämpfen?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1