„On 23rd February 2022, when the editors had worked out topical issues of dispute relating to politics, ethics, technology and religion for a Hans Jonas Centre conference on responsibility for the future and discourse ethics, it was suddenly foreseeable that Russia would invade the core area of Ukraine the next night. We immediately informed our Ukrainian colleagues that we would allow them asylum, if desired, and invite them to the conference in Bad Kissingen as keynote speakers. In no time at (...) all, the new programme for the confer-ence was ready: After commemorating Hans Jonas' honorary doctorate in Berlin under the motto ‘Fatalism would be a mortal sin’ exactly 30 years ago, we now focus on ‘Discourse despite war’. After that, we discuss digitalisation as well as theology, philosophy and commitment". With contributions by Prof. Dr. Claus Altmayer; Harald Asel, M.A.; Dorothee Bär, MdB; Dr. Thomas Bausch; Prof. Dr. Dietrich Böhler; Prof. Dr. Michael Bongardt; Wolfgang Freese; Bernadette Herrmann, M.A.; Sebastian Höpfl; Bischof em. Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Huber; Dr. Grigori Katsakoulis; Pfarrer Wolfgang Klein; Wolfgang Korb; Dr. Lena Kornyeyeva; Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Klaus Leisinger; Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Hans Lenk; Prof. Dr. Ulf Liedke; Prof. Dr. Alfons Matheis; Dr. Olaf Meyer; Dr. Jürgen Naeher-Zeiffer; Stephanie von Dallwitz; Dr. Marianne Rabe; Dr. Manuela Rottmann, MdB; PD Dr. Dr. Thomas Rusche; Prof. Dr. Johann Michael Schmidt; Dr. Eva-Maria Schwickert; Maritta Strasser, M.A.; OB Dr. Dirk Vogel and Prof. Dr. Anatoliy Yermolenko. (shrink)

Contemporary analyses of unmigration cannot accurately portray the realities of border crossing without paying attention to poverty as a common sense concern for citizens, just as the act of border crossmg must be understood from the perspective of people who face real decisions about crossing borders. Through a feminist analysis of common sense conceptions of poverty, this essay exposes the act of border crossing as conceived in the minds of those facing actual life and death situations. Situating this analysis primarily (...) within U.S. American discourse, perhaps those best suited to explain the role that poverty plays are conmiunity organizers, public intellectuals and activists who unport notions of border crossings from theh experiences with impoverished communities in order to develop rich theoretical descriptions of border crossing. To that end, the essay considers the writing of Jane Addams, W.E.B. Du Bois, Suzanne Pharr and similar American thinkers. (shrink)

The present commentary emphasizes that the acquisition of fear always involves complex changes in several quasi-independent response systems. Stimulus-specific electrodermal response differentiation as well as the bias to overestimate the belongingness of certain stimulus pairs mainly indicates cognitive processes of selective orienting and attention. Emotion, however, also involves the activation of subcortical motivational circuits. Why certain stimuli acquire rapid access to these basic motivational systems is not explained by the expectancy bias model.

Peace literacy shows why public philosophy and activism for peace and justice are better together while providing a practical framework designed to make the collaboration stronger and more effective. In this chapter, the authors begin with an overview of peace literacy and then show how it operates as an effective lens through which to read the strengths of various approaches to public philosophy and activism for peace and justice, from the eighteenth to the twentieth centuries and into the contemporary period. (...) Then, they turn to the development of peace literacy themes as we find them in the work of philosophers dedicated to publicly engaged activism for peace and justice, especially in American movements for the abolition of chattel slavery, anti‐war and nonviolence, and civil rights. (shrink)

The objective of this article is to contribute to an understanding of Hannah Arendt’s special place in present-day political theory by means of a contrast between her Origins of Totalitarianism and four important political science studies of National Socialism and totalitarianism, three written by authors who shared the status of involuntary emigrant with Arendt, that are offered as constituting the original context of her work. A critical appreciation of the seminal works by Ernst Fraenkel, Franz L. Neumann, Sigmund Neumann, and (...) Carl Joachim Friedrich and Zbigniew Brezinski, with special emphasis on questions of method, opens the way to a reconsideration of the distinctly philosophical character of Arendt’s work, and its shocking challenges to the scientific orientations of political science. (shrink)

Betrifft die Handschrift Cod. 579 der Burgerbibliothek Bern.

Participation of a broad variety of actors in decision-making processes has become an important issue in science and technology policy. Many authors claim the involvement of stakeholders and of the general public to be a core condition for legitimate and sustainable decision making. In the last decades, a wide spectrum of procedures has been developed to realize biotechnological citizenship. These procedures, composed of multiactor arenas, are either located in close relation to the system of politics, or, as in the case (...) of administrative decision making, more closely to the system of law. In the latter case, a problematic constellation arises. Here, law and science can build a technoscientific normativity that systematically excludes political discourse. The law, although intending to provide for political freedom and citizenship rights, at the end appears to be an ‘‘iron cage’’ for political communication. (shrink)

Der Produktionsfaktor Wissen produziert nicht nur Wissen, sondern zugleich auch Unwissen. Die Wissensgesellschaft ist auch eine Risikogesellschaft, in der die Normalität von Unfällen ebenso zu akzeptieren ist, wie das Fungieren der Gesellschaft als Labor neuer Technologien. Vor diesem Hintergrund der Gesellschaft als Wissensgesellschaft mit ihren beiden Seiten der Innovation und des Risikos ist die Frage zu sehen, wie die moderne Gesellschaft die ihr spezifische Problematik bearbeitet, mehr denn je von einem nicht auf seine positive Seite festlegbaren Wissen abhängig zu sein.