Cancel culture is a form of societal self-defense that becomes prominent particularly during periods of substantial moral upheaval. It can lead to the polarization of incompatible viewpoints if it is indiscriminately demonized. In this brief editorial letter, I consider framing cancel culture as an essentially contested concept (ECC), according to the theory of Walter B. Gallie, with the aim of establishing a groundwork for a more productive discourse on it. In particular, I propose that intermediate agreements and principles (...) of reasonableness can help refocus the debate on cancel culture towards democratic discourse, without blanket justification for every instance. In this context, asserting that cancel culture is an ECC does not dismiss the potential of achieving consensus on its shared core meaning or societal role. Like other similar ECCs, such as democracy or rule of law, it highlights the importance of contestations in shaping our collective understanding of the concept. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Cancel Culture and the Trope of the ScapegoatA Girardian Defense of the Importance of Contemplative ReadingJoakim Wrethed (bio)What unfolds in this article encompasses violence, language/reading, and ethics. René Girard addresses these topics primarily in terms of mimesis, its potential violence, and the trope of the scapegoat. Still, toward the end of his career and life, he relentlessly pointed out the dangers implicated in the dynamism of these forces. (...) He addressed it clearly in his "apocalyptic book" Battling to the End (2010):I have been accused of repeating myself too often, of turning my theory into a fetish, of using it to explain everything. Yet it has described mechanisms that recent discoveries in neuroscience confirm: imitation is the initial and essential means of learning; it is not something acquired later on. We can escape mimetism only by understanding the laws that govern it. Only by understanding the dangers of imitation can we conceive of authentic identification with the Other. However, we are becoming aware of the primacy of moral relationship at the very time when the atomization of humanity is being realized, and when violence has increased in intensity and unpredictability.1[End Page 15] It is this thin line between necessary/harmless imitation and its dangerous versions that will be the central theme in the analysis. As Girard states, a vast amount of established research confirms that the mimetic impulse is innate.2 We should pay specific attention to "the atomization of humanity," since it zooms in on our contemporary epoch's paradoxical "mass-individualism," evidently tremendously enhanced by information and communication technology (ICT). In order to contribute to Girard's lifework and to extend it beyond his own writing, we outline a few contemporary phenomena that clearly exhibit the primordial dangers of human violence that Girard draws attention to. These phenomena are initially only roughly sketched, but subsequent sections give them sharper relief. The central phenomena are cancel culture, speed, and the reading of literature. Just to be clear, the intended mode of reading should be construed in a broad sense, thus potentially including philosophy and theology, if one is inclined to emphasize the differences between these disciplines and the reading of literature.3Cancel culture in certain ways makes manifest a social welfare society version of escalating violence, indicating that "violence has increased in intensity and unpredictability."4 A succinct definition of cancel culture will initially suffice:Cancel culture refers to ending (or attempting to end) an individual's career or prominence to hold them accountable for immoral behavior. Driven primarily by young progressives, often through social media, cancel culture has attracted controversy since it swept into the national conversation.5This definition can easily be extended into larger historical patterns in which, for instance, colonial crimes are highlighted and demands are raised for contemporary acts of atonement. As Rob Henderson points out, the obvious flip side is that "the swift and decisive nature of cancel culture can stifle debate, and some believe that dialogue is a more productive way to foster change."6 The "swiftness" and the immediate collectable consequences are decisive in their functions as social punishment and exclusion; in other words, digitalized speed accomplishes verdict and punishment in a very short time span, which is a reflection of desire pure and simple. The rapidity from intention to anticipated effect rather resembles an instinctive and violent action more than the forwarding of a carefully thought through argument or statement. The present becomes an invincible ivory tower bristling with power to finally mete out the justice that the erroneous ethics of earlier times were incapable of conceiving and achieving. An always already accelerating modernity speeded up immensely through [End Page 16] the fast growth of information and communication technology (ICT). To be sure, the whole evolution of computer technology is defined primarily in terms of processing speed, together with the quantity of information that can be contained in as small a spatial entity as possible. The present-day reality of having almost everything only one or a few clicks away on a screen—as a modern day realization of the library in Alexandria—enhances the relevance of a phenomenon historians have referred to... (shrink)

In this article, I approach some phenomena seen predominantly on social-media sites that are grouped together as cancel culture with guidance from two major themes in Plato’s thought. In the first section, I argue that shame can play a constructive and valuable role in a person’s improvement, just as we see Socrates throughout Plato’s dialogues use shame to help his interlocutors improve. This insight can help us understand the value of shaming people online for, among other things, their morally (...) reprehensible views. In the second section, I argue that it is required for the proper functioning of democratic institutions that some views be excluded from the public sphere, which follows some Platonic ideas from the Laws. In neither case do I argue that this approach is good in an unqualified sense or even ultima facie good. However, I maintain that these important insights from Plato’s dialogues illuminate crucial aspects of how we should think about cancel culture. (shrink)

Science is critical and thrives on discourse. However, new challenges for science and academic freedom have arisen from an often-discussed cancel culture and an increasing demand for safe spaces, which are justified by their assumed protection against microaggressions. These phenomena can impede scientific progress and innovation by prohibiting certain thought processes and heterodox ideas that eventually result in new ideas, publications, statements, etc. In this paper, we use the approach of property rights ethics to shed light on these phenomena, (...) especially in academia. First, we argue that microaggressions must be generally tolerated according to property rights ethics as the starting point for discussion. Then, we analyze cancel culture and safe spaces in academia. To this end, we distinguish between two basic cases in the educational system. We show that cancel culture and safe spaces seem justifiable in a private education system but have no place in public, tax-funded universities from the perspective of property ethics. Our essay contributes, on the one hand, to the economic analysis of science and, on the other hand, to the ethical study of new phenomena in modern societies. (shrink)

Cancel culture necessitates a thorough examination for optimizing the efficacy of reputation management and societal influence. It’s essential to assess its effectiveness in driving social change, recognize ethical nuances, and pinpoint potential issues. Originally a value-driven phenomenon, it has evolved into a manipulative tool, amplifying societal emotions. Despite attempts at crisis communication, it often fails to alleviate the consequences for individuals or businesses subjected to «cancellation». The purpose of the study. The article explores cancel culture as a mechanism (...) for social influence and activity, presenting it as an ambiguous phenomenon without clear positive or negative connotations. Methods. The study employed interdisciplinary and logical methods, incorporating systemic and functional approaches, to comprehensively analyze cancel culture. The logical-contradictory method characterized cancel culture as a neutral phenomenon. Content analysis of mass media, social networks, and other platforms was conducted to determine its impact on the public sphere. Results.The article delves into cancel culture within an instrumental context, scrutinizing its effects on influencers and the broader audience. It highlights trends in cancel culture and its significance in the media landscape. Examining its origins across historical contexts, from ancient Greece to Soviet denunciations, reveals cancel culture’s rise in popularity through internet influence. Its core aim is to attribute «violations» to individuals or their communicators, employing mechanics like mass negative reactions and imposing consequences such as boycotts, dismissals, and even death threats. Cancel culture introduces contradictions, resembling a «witch hunt» with the potential for unfair cancellations due to the presumption of innocence and challenges in proving guilt. It denies the right to make mistakes and impacts individuals differently across cultures. While effective on social media, cancel culture often shifts from broad campaigns to personal-level cancellations, capturing societal attention and influencing perceptions of canceled entities.Despite initial destructiveness, it can stimulate constructive discussion and shape public opinion, but risks include excessive sensitivity and the potential for aggression and psychological self-assertion. Cancel culture poses the danger of low personal responsibility, fostering manipulation and abuse. Sociocultural aspects involve the tolerance paradox and the influence of egocentrism on participants.Cancelling may become a tool for personal aggression rather than a quest for justice. Distinguishing real violations from exaggerated or outdated statements is crucial to avoid unjust sanctions. Despite its justice-seeking appearance, cancel culture often relies on emotions and subjective factors, emphasizing the need for careful case analysis. Conclusions. Cancel culture provides a space for discussion as it can serve as a tool for advocating social change and raises questions about the responsibility of influential individuals. However, it is manipulative and selective, and the examination of each cancellation case should consider potential bias and subjectivity. Another danger lies in the increasing sensitivity of audiences to content, which may lead to the perception of offensive material without considering the real context of events. (shrink)

Many view cancellation as a method for holding influential personalities accountable for bad behavior, while others think cancelling amounts to censorship and bullying. I hold that neither of these accounts are worth pursuing, especially if the aim is social progress. In this paper, I offer a situated account of cancellation and cancel culture, locating the phenomenon in our exclusionary history while examining the social dynamics of belief. When we situate cancel culture, we can see how problematic instances of (...) cancelling are embedded in ignorance. While combatting ignorance appears to call for a remedy rooted in feminist standpoint epistemology, there are risks in adopting naive practices of deference. Applying criticisms of epistemic injustice and adopting Táíwò’s elite capture framework, I explain how well-intentioned cancelling can work against social movements. Since epistemic trust mechanisms discourage self-reflection and belief revision, the relevant tactics for enacting social change—coalition politics and education—seem out of reach. I conclude by sketching cancel culture as a diagnostic tool: cancellation can be used appropriately in marginalized communities, but when it comes to combatting ignorance among privileged folks, we should view cancel culture as a method for determining where our social institutions are failing us. (shrink)

In a world undergoing rapid, large-scale technological change, the phenomenon of technosocial disruption is receiving increasing scholarly and societal attention. While the phenomenon is most actively delineated in philosophy of technology, it is also receiving growing attention within a different area of philosophy, namely the so-called “4E Cognition” approach to philosophy of mind. Despite this shared interest in technosocial disruption, there is relatively little exchange between the theorizing going on in these two different areas of philosophy. One of our paper's (...) two main aims is programmatic: to motivate the fruitfulness of such an exchange. We do this by turning to a specific case of technosocial disruption, namely Teenage Cancel Culture [TCC]. TCC cannot be disentangled from the introduction of social media platforms [SMPs] into modern day social life. Hence, we will speak of SMP-Afforded TCC. SPM-afforded TCC is a phenomenon fretted over by societal actors but strikingly ignored in academic research. In our effort to narrow this knowledge gap, we analyze SMP-afforded TCC from a perspective of technosocial disruption enriched by insights from 4E-Cognition. This brings out a specific worry about the role of SMPs in the social lives of teenagers. We argue that SMP-afforded TCC disrupts the social relational domains within which teenagers develop, maintain, and express their precarious social identities, by creating social affordances that are hostile to healthy risky interpersonal identity-exploration. As such, SMP-afforded TCC not only cancels particular individuals for particular acts; it may also pre-emptively cancel a certain way of being a social self, namely a healthy social risk-taker. We conclude the paper by proposing several potential routes for mitigating the perniciously disruptive effects of SMP-afforded TCC and identifying future areas for research. (shrink)

What are the moral implications of cancel culture? If it is viewed as a means to achieve social justice, we might be more inclined to say that cancel culture is morally good. However, one could argue that cancel culture has too harsh consequences or involves immoral – even hateful – behaviour. We propose that cancel culture is used as an umbrella term for (at least) two different kinds of ‘cancelling’. Cancelling is often seen in public debate (...) as punishment. Following Radzik’s objections to social punishment we argue that this kind of cancelling is morally reprehensible. However, cancel culture as an umbrella term also includes other kinds of cancelling. Many also refer to cancel culture as a phenomenon when someone is being called out or held accountable for their supposedly problematic behaviour. Such cancelling does not need to be punishment, but is often rather an attempt to remove privileged access to the public sphere. In this way, cancelling is used as a tool for redistributing attention: it can (re)claim attention and recognition for marginalized perspectives, by a radical attempt to deny a privileged person access to the public sphere. We conclude that cancel culture as a whole cannot be seen as either morally good or bad, because ‘cancelling’ can be used as a tool for both punishment and redistribution. Each have their own moral implications: cancelling as punishment is reprehensible, but cancelling to redistribute attention might be less of a problem. (shrink)

In the past couple of years, much has been said and written in the media about the notion of 'cancel culture' and the way in which various celebrities, journalists, politicians, ideas, and monuments have been cancelled. Yet, the conversations taking place on this issue have been largely uninformed, lacking intellectual rigor, and devoid of the historical and cultural context that could help make the contested debates more enlightening. The author investigates the phenomenon of cancelling historically as well as how (...) it became an issue recently. The book presents some compelling philosophical arguments against the practice of cancelling and highlights various educational dangers and risks that emerge from this practice and deserve our attention. (shrink)

This article argues that Slavoj Žižek’s provocative speech at the Frankfurt Book Fair was a political event of the first order. Described as a major scandal triggered by Žižek’s remarks on the Israel-Hamas war, the speech was much more than a deliberate provocation. It provides a window into a world that had become unhinged long before the conflict erupted anew. It offers an opportunity to observe the complex relationship between individuals, institutions, and society. It continues to be a cautionary tale (...) that illustrates the thin line between courage and hypocrisy; and how difficult it is to practise diversity in a world gripped by the dangerous logic of evil. Thus, Žižek’s opening address transcends its immediate context because it brings us up against one of today’s defining questions: what does it mean, and what does it take, to practise diversity when facing the most divisive topics of our time? (shrink)

Le mouvement de réappropriation des espaces physiques et virtuels de parole pour dénoncer les injustices et ceux qui les commettent a pris des formes multiples : de l’occupation de places publiques à la libération de la parole contre les violences systémiques, sexistes et racistes en particulier, via des mouvements comme #MeToo et #OnVeutRespirer. Les féminismes contemporains s’inscrivent ainsi dans un contexte de mobilisation caractérisé par la défiance vis-à-vis d’une démocratie représentative perçue comme confisquée par les élites et par un horizon (...) de « convergence des luttes » ne recomposant pas l’hégémonie d’un critère ou d’une idéologie. Comment, au sein de la société française contemporaine, l’entrecroisement des urgences écologique, sociale et sanitaire questionne-t-il le rapport à l’engagement, en particulier féministe? Cette interrogation est appréhendée à partir d’une enquête qualitative, menée de juillet 2019 à août 2020, auprès de plus de 120 responsables associatifs féministes, anti-racistes, écologistes, antispécistes, pour la justice sociale et/ou de lutte contre la pauvreté, mais aussi d’activistes avec des affiliations plurielles et fluides. Après avoir abordé la manière dont la question du « faire commun » se pose à l’ère de la Covid-19 et des controverses autour de la « cancel culture », nous examinerons comment les féminismes contemporains sont mis à l’épreuve par l’horizon d’une émancipation partagée dans une interdépendance apaisée. (shrink)

Nicht erst seit dem Aufkommen des Begriffs der »Cancel Culture« scheint es, als könne man schlicht nicht mehr miteinander reden. Die unterschiedlichen Konzeptionen von Ziel und Methode, also von der Strategie gesellschaftlicher Auseinandersetzungen, variieren so stark, dass sie schlicht nicht mehr kommensurabel sind. Diese Situation lässt sich als das Resultat einer langen Geschichte strategischer Entwürfe und Gegenentwürfe begreifen. Christopher Jakob Rudoll gibt anhand der Beispiele von Marxismus, Katholizismus und Feminismus einen systematischen Überblick über Debattenkulturen in Theorie und Praxis seit (...) den 1920er-Jahren - und hilft somit, die aktuelle Sprachlosigkeit besser zu verstehen. (shrink)

The subject of the study is the semantic content of cultural diplomacy. The relevance of addressing this topic is determined by the specifics of the current stage of development of international relations, when cultural diplomacy finds itself in a situation of sharply narrowed opportunities amid the intensification of counterproductive strategies of “cancel culture.” The purpose of the work is to trace the features of the disclosure of values and meanings of the period of recent sociocultural turbulence. The objectives of (...) the study are 1) to clarify the nature of the attitude of representatives of creative professions to the political and ideological realities of the time; 2) highlight the difference between the dichotomies “political / non-political” and “official / unofficial”; 3) establish the significance of each part of these dichotomies in solving the problems of cultural diplomacy; 4) to trace theoretical and practical approaches to the components of these dichotomies on the part of representatives of artistic culture in the light of the paradigm of meaning-making as a key value of culture; 5) determine the possibilities and boundaries of interaction between representatives of creative professions and the political context of their activities. The research methodology is based on an integrated approach based on data from cultural history, cultural anthropology, and political psychology within the framework of the theory of intercultural communication. The key method used is categorical analysis, as well as discourse analysis, which allows us to trace blocks of value preferences, taking into account the characteristics of current historical and cultural processes. The novelty of the study lies in identifying the possibilities and boundaries for the development of cultural contacts in an era of current turbulence (primarily political), when, against the backdrop of the intensification of “cancel culture,” the possibilities for such interactions are reduced. (shrink)

This paper advances a Marxist critique of the politics of cancellation and raises concerns about the possible development of a cancel culture. Rather than delving into debates on freedom of speech, crucial though they are, this paper focuses on the pragmatics of the political tool – its goals, mechanisms, effects, and the underlying reasoning. From a Marxist perspective, it is essential to analyse cancellation and cancel culture holistically, considering their rationale, the mechanism, the objectives, and the impacts, along (...) with their relationship to the material conditions of society. Such an analysis provides a comprehensive understanding of any historical development and argues that addressing political problems in the long term requires such a holistic approach, including the development of relevant productive forces. If cancellation evolves into a culture, it may give rise to a polity that reinforces market relations. Within the framework of historical materialism, this would be a case of the superstructure supporting the base, turning politics into a matter of private opinions, which is far from ideal. The paper concludes with some practical considerations. (shrink)

This paper advances a Marxist critique of the politics of cancellation and raises concerns about the possible development of a cancel culture. Rather than delving into debates on freedom of speech, crucial though they are, this paper focuses on the pragmatics of the political tool – its goals, mechanisms, effects, and the underlying reasoning. From a Marxist perspective, it is essential to analyse cancellation and cancel culture holistically, considering their rationale, the mechanism, the objectives, and the impacts, along (...) with their relationship to the material conditions of society. Such an analysis provides a comprehensive understanding of any historical development and argues that addressing political problems in the long term requires such a holistic approach, including the development of relevant productive forces. If cancellation evolves into a culture, it may give rise to a polity that reinforces market relations. Within the framework of historical materialism, this would be a case of the superstructure supporting the base, turning politics into a matter of private opinions, which is far from ideal. The paper concludes with some practical considerations. (shrink)

Taking its cue from Vladimir Putin’s use of Dostoevsky to support his critical view of Western culture, the article challenges the view that Dostoevsky can be straightforwardly corralled into the Russian President’s nationalistic and imperialistic agenda. Instead, it follows the approach taken by George Lukacs in response to National Socialism’s self-representation as the authentic inheritor of the German cultural tradition, namely, to show that any great cultural work is going to be resistant to the kind of one-dimensional interpretations typical of (...) authoritarian regimes. Particularly, the article focusses on much-debated passages of Dostoevsky’s The Possessed (aka Demons) to show that the writer has a more nuanced view and that his work contains resources to resist today’s ultra-nationalism. (shrink)

The article is devoted to the decolonization of Ukrainian culture as an important factor of nation-building in the European perspective. At the same time, decolonization is a current trend in Western academic thought, which is embodied in social activism, in particular, in the wok movement and the culture of abolition. Postcolonial studies has become an intellectual battleground. These studies draw a new front line in the culture wars. Rethinking Western culture in light of its imperial expansionist past defines the goal (...) of decolonization. However, the tendency towards the politicization of vouk and the culture of cancellation. carries the risks of undermining the basic values of Western culture - freedom of thought and the rule of law, while the decolonization of Ukrainian culture has a different purpose. Unlike cultural decolonization in Western countries, cultural decolonization in Ukraine is aimed at legitimizing modern European values (Lisbon Agreement, 2007) by overcoming the «Russian-oriented» (Eurasian) tradition of thinking.Identifying the authentic contents of Ukrainian culture and refuting its imperial-Soviet interpretations is one of the main tasks of the decolonization of Ukrainian culture. The article offers a comparative analysis of Ukrainian and Western versions of cultural decolonization in order to avoid uncritical borrowings and ignoring the peculiarities of the Ukrainian context. The successful decolonization of Ukrainian culture requires the development of its 1) concept, 2) methods of theoretical substantiation, and 3) methods of practical implementation. The article states that the decolonization of Ukrainian culture becomes possible if its research strategies are deprived of colonial influences, which reveal indications of the imperial and Soviet scientific paradigm of social and humanitarian knowledge. The key concepts of the research are referring to the works of Nigel Giggar (2023), Douglas Murray (2022), Linda Martín Alcoff (2023), Jonh Darwin (2009), Kwasi Kwarteng (2013), Yaroslav Hrytsak (2022), Serhii Plokhii (2021, 2023), Timothy D. Snyder (2017, 2918) and others. (shrink)

Political Liberty is presently under stress for different reasons, two of them are: the erosion of civic culture and the policies chosen to restrict Covid-19. In this article I develop an account of political liberty that is bound to core concepts of humanistic anthropology and metaphysical freedom (I). On this conceptual basis I discuss two actual challenges of political liberty: cancel culture (II) and anti-pandemic state measures (III).

Cultural pluralism in the Balkans has often been considered as the source of conflict in the region. Against this perspective it is suggested that Enlightenment political thought in southeastern Europe, as represented by the radical republicanism of Rhigas Velestinlis , incorporated the idea of cultural pluralism in a project for a unitary democratic state, modelled on the 'Republic of Virtue', that was expected to replace despotism and to transform its subjects into free citizens. The political culture of this state would (...) be provided by the principles of republican Hellenism while its ethnic pluralism would be located in its civil society. It is stressed that republican Hellenism was a political and moral, not an ethnic, project. This political project however, was preempted by the emergence of cultural nationalism that cancelled the Enlightenment vision of democratic citizenship, equality and recognition for individuals as well as ethnic groups in a unitary republic. (shrink)

Philosophers and political theorists tackle the question of cultural transformation in the twenty-first century and the role discourse norms play in producing cancel culture, a counter-sexual revolution, racism and a toxic politics that has left the nation feeling vulnerable and angry.

ABSTRACTIt is well known that advertising and branding co-opts counter culture to sell commodities, but in this article we uncover the ontological conditions for such an appropriation. We investigate a particular example of contemporary advertising, the Levis commercial “Legacy – Now is our Time“, which was subsequently pulled because of the British riots of that year, as a historical situated and saturated moment. This article employs Benjamin's notion of the phantasmagoria to uncover the messianic possibilities of a future hidden in (...) the cynicism of the image, and Freud’s essay on ‘The Uncanny’ to suggest the particular temporal structure of this future as a repetition of an absolute past. Such an example of advertising and branding is situated within the overall theory of subjectification of late capitalism, where the dominate concept of capital is human capital, and in which capital is directly parasitical on creativity and life. (shrink)

This book will be published in the second half of 2025. It has eight chapters: 1. privacy; 2. the attention economy; 3. nudging; 4. echo chambers and polarization; 5. misinformation; 6. cancel culture: online shaming and caring; 7. friendship; and 8. the duty to quit. Each chapter has several cases to prompt discussion and reflection, as well as a glossary of key terms and an annotated bibliography.

The article considers the place and role of discourse in human life. The basis for this is the im- portance of language and speech as one of the leading features of humanity. Thanks to language, a person’s own reality is formed, which has a semantic character. Four dimensions of the effect of speech in the constitution of the human world are identified. These are: the function of se- mantic productivity and reliability of speech; function of organization and accumulation of ex- (...) perience; the function of normativity of human life; personalization function. The acquisition of the discourse format by speech is associated with the assertion of significance and substantiation of the validity of judgments. These qualities of discursive practices are inseparable from their normative effect. If speech as such is dominated by the effect of communication and statements, the discourse is primarily a semantic ordering of reality. It always creates, transforms or cancels a certain semantic order. The thesis on the growing role of discursive practices in the contempo- rary world is substantiated. This is due to the epoch-making changes in human life, namely the end of the era of production. The whole history of human civilization can be represented as the development of production (from the invention of the production mode of economy in the form of the Neolithic revolution). The end of the era of production means at the same time the actu- alization of the great historical task of man’s appeal to himself, to his own nature and organic ability to live. Taking care of yourself, not the conditions of existence (external goods) will be a priority for human development in the near historical perspective. However, this reorientation of human existence is confronted with the contradictory impact of virtualization of reality for man, which entails changes in the classical vocation of discourse. In this regard, the effect of discourses in the highly powerful information environment of today is analyzed, which is becoming the leading force of global reality in the form of information power. (shrink)

The reception of Avicenna by medieval Jewish readers presents an underappreciated enigma. Despite the philosophical and scientific stature of Avicenna, his philosophical writings were relatively little studied in Jewish milieus, be it in Arabic or in Hebrew. In particular, Avicenna's philosophical writings are not among the “Hebräische Übersetzungen des Mittelalters” – only very few of them were translated into Hebrew. As an author associated with a definite corpus of writings, Avicenna hardly existed in Jewish philosophy in Hebrew. Paradoxically, however, some (...) of Avicenna's most distinctive ideas were widely known and embraced by Jewish philosophers. This is the phenomenon that we dub Avicennian knowledge without Avicenna. In contrast with the philosophical treatises, Avicenna's medical writings were widely and intensively studied by Jews, especially in Hebrew, and remained influential until at least the seventeenth century. The present article presents a comprehensive picture of Avicenna's reception within medieval Jewish cultures in both Arabic and Hebrew and tries to explain the Jews’ complex attitude to Avicenna.La réception d'Avicenne par les érudits juifs médiévaux présente une énigme dont on n'a pas encore pris toute la mesure. Malgré la grande stature scientifique et philosophique d'Avicenne, ses écrits philosophiques ont été peu connus des savants juifs, que ce soit en arabe ou en hébreu. Ils n'ont guère fait partie des “Hebräische Übersetzungen des Mittelalters” – peu seulement ont été traduits en hébreu. En tant qu’auteur associé à un corpus de textes, Avicenne n'existe presque pas dans la philosophie juive en hébreu. Paradoxalement cependant, certaines des idées les plus caractéristiques d'Avicenne étaient bien connues et acceptées par des philosophes juifs. Nous appelons ce phénomène savoir avicennien sans Avicenne. Contrairement aux écrits philosophiques, les ouvrages médicaux d'Avicenne, eux, étaient lus et utilisés par les juifs, notamment en traductions hébraïques, et ce jusqu'au xviie siècle. Cet article présente un tableau général de la réception d'Avicenne, en arabe et en hébreu, dans les différentes cultures juives et il tente d'expliquer l'attitude complexe des savants juifs vis-à-vis d'Avicenne.Send article to KindleTo send this article to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply. Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.AVICENNA AMONG MEDIEVAL JEWS THE RECEPTION OF AVICENNA'S PHILOSOPHICAL, SCIENTIFIC AND MEDICAL WRITINGS IN JEWISH CULTURES, EAST AND WESTVolume 22, Issue 2Gad Freudenthal and Mauro Zonta DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0957423912000033Your Kindle email address Please provide your Kindle [email protected]@kindle.com Available formats PDF Please select a format to send. By using this service, you agree that you will only keep articles for personal use, and will not openly distribute them via Dropbox, Google Drive or other file sharing services. Please confirm that you accept the terms of use. Cancel Send ×Send article to Dropbox To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox. AVICENNA AMONG MEDIEVAL JEWS THE RECEPTION OF AVICENNA'S PHILOSOPHICAL, SCIENTIFIC AND MEDICAL WRITINGS IN JEWISH CULTURES, EAST AND WESTVolume 22, Issue 2Gad Freudenthal and Mauro Zonta DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0957423912000033Available formats PDF Please select a format to send. By using this service, you agree that you will only keep articles for personal use, and will not openly distribute them via Dropbox, Google Drive or other file sharing services. Please confirm that you accept the terms of use. Cancel Send ×Send article to Google Drive To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive. AVICENNA AMONG MEDIEVAL JEWS THE RECEPTION OF AVICENNA'S PHILOSOPHICAL, SCIENTIFIC AND MEDICAL WRITINGS IN JEWISH CULTURES, EAST AND WESTVolume 22, Issue 2Gad Freudenthal and Mauro Zonta DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0957423912000033Available formats PDF Please select a format to send. By using this service, you agree that you will only keep articles for personal use, and will not openly distribute them via Dropbox, Google Drive or other file sharing services. Please confirm that you accept the terms of use. Cancel Send ×Export citation Request permission. (shrink)

Zygmunt Bauman said of 1968 that he could not empathize with the enthusiasm of the Western Left, that this was some kind of party. In Eastern Europe 1968 stood for an end, not a hope. Soon Bauman would be forced into exile, opening a new and brilliant phase of his intellectual trajectory. Sketches in the Theory of Culture was his last Polish book. It was suppressed in 1968, the contract cancelled in retaliation against his support for reforming politics. Now it (...) has been rediscovered, originally in galley proofs, and translated by Dariusz Brzezinski for Polity Press. Like much of Bauman’s work, it is sprawling and inclusive, taking in anthropology, sociology of culture, ethnology and semiotics. It anticipates his life-long enthusiasm for Lévi-Strauss; and it also foreshadows some of the themes much later to be identified as liquid modern, though it may be the case that the theme of continuity is rather social turbulence from postwar reconstruction to the travails of socialist Poland. In this paper I review some of its themes and its status in the body of his work, and offer some introductory remarks on its importance to the study of culture. (shrink)

The postmodern critique of modernity has focused on the construction of the modern subject and the self‐disciplining and self‐cancellation tendencies within it. This critique, however, fails to consider what happens during the early years of children’s development — the period during which the modern subject is made, and the one in which the paradoxes and ambiguities inherent in modern subjectivity are established. In this essay Guoping Zhao analyzes how children’s developmental process affects the definition and formation of the self in (...) the United States. She uses a cross‐cultural lens, comparing the dominant cultural ideas and practices associated with child development in the United States with those influenced and supported by Confucianism. Zhao argues that children’s paths of development are not natural but cultural ones guided by underlying ideologies, and ultimately concludes that this cultural process determines the shapes and forms of the modern subject and the nature of individual freedom and autonomy. (shrink)

In an era of cancel culture, digital identities and thriving conversation surrounding parasocial relationships, we question today the nature of the celebrity, the scope of their power and influence, as well as the ethical issues these implicate. It is a wonder, then, that philosophy is a discipline that has, as of yet, contributed surprisingly little to this debate despite the growing philosophical literature on connected philosophical topics that serve as a starting point for the philosophical inquiry into the nature (...) and value of fame and celebrity. For example, the literature on the philosophy of admiration, achievement, skills and talents, epistemic authority, virtue and moral psychology can all serve to analyse the important questions arise when considering what fame is, and the way that it influences the way we live. Offering the first introductory overview of the key philosophical issues involved in the nature and value of fame and celebrity, this edited collection provides a new perspective and voice to the conversation. Divided into four parts, its first focuses on conceptual differences between fame and celebrity, the experience of being famous, how celebrities interact with the public, and what motivates people to desire or pursue fame. The second part of the volume explores fame and virtue as well as the ways in which ethical issues intertwine with fame, concluding with an examination of the nature of fame in relation to contemporary online culture. As digital technologies expand, cultural commentators remark that we are all becoming celebrities, scrutinized by the public gaze whether we like it or not. This book therefore answers a pressing need, for if celebrity culture continues to expand and consume our social lives, the case for a philosophical reflection on the nature and value of this culture becomes even more necessary. (shrink)

Christian ethics has from the beginning been concerned with moral agency and culture, and Christian social ethics has acknowledged the power of social structures for the last 150 years. But ethics has yet to employ extensively the resources of that discipline that specializes in understanding structure and culture: sociology. Out of a concern to defend human freedom, Catholic social teaching has employed an individualistic approach that misdescribes the characteristics of social evil as little more than the sum of individual choices (...) and proposes individual conversion as a remedy. This book presents a refined sociological understanding of social structures and culture: critical realist sociology. It briefly describes the roots of critical realism in the natural sciences, its understanding of social structure and culture, and how structure and culture have causal impact on human decisions - through freedom, not cancelling it. It makes clear how, in most cases, people "go along" with the restrictions and opportunities offered them but, when there is sufficient frustration with these, how decisions can transform both structure and culture. The analysis is then applied in more detail to provide needed illumination in three areas: the ecological crisis, economic life, and virtue ethics. The core claims of the volume, offering an explanatory account of moral-agency-amidst-structure-and-culture for use in social ethics, would be of great interest to all those working in the field, both Catholic and Protestant. (shrink)

In quale rapporto sono oggi storia e memoria e in che modo esse agiscono nel discorso pubblico? Per comprenderlo bisogna analizzare il grande spazio che la memoria ha conquistato negli ultimi anni, mettendo al centro dell’attenzione pubblica il Novecento, come secolo tragico, e la Shoah. E interrogarsi sulla necessità di aprire una fase di riflessione più ampia sulle politiche della violenza agite tra Otto e Novecento dagli Stati in tutto il mondo, in primo luogo sul colonialismo. Un percorso che, solo, (...) può consentire di ritrovare un giusto rapporto con la storia. (shrink)

In recent years, the far right “culture war” has to an increasing extent been allowed to set the terms for cultural policy debates, in Sweden and internationally. In the Swedish context, empty accusations against public cultural institutions of “wokeist” bias and “cancel culture” have found support in a public report from the governmental Agency for Cultural Policy Analysis, which claims that national public funding bodies are imposing politically correct demands on their applicants, with a “detrimental influence” on the freedom (...) of art. This article shows that the ACPA lacks grounds for these claims. Taking its cue from the ACPA’s report, it instead focuses on the fundamental and contested concept of the freedom or the autonomy of art. It seeks to outline what would need to characterise a critical concept of the autonomy of art today, and asks what the political implications would be of a rigorous understanding of such a concept. It argues that cultural policy should be understood as a project of cultural democratization, which should in turn be understood as a project of autonomy. (shrink)

This short article represents a contribution to the debate on the motion “Social science is explanation, or it is nothing.” While in the format of parliamentary debating the contribution would fall on the side of the opposition, I will not be arguing against explanation as such. The work of explaining is in no way oppositional to or mutually exclusive with critique. Instead, my contribution will revolve around two arguments: one is that both critique and explanation exhibit characteristics we commonly attribute (...) to science; the other is that reserving the label of science for explanation draws a boundary around social sciences in ways that exclude many of the interesting things it does. Some of the examples include the sociological analysis of governmental approaches to the COVID-19 pandemic, or critical analysis of concepts such as “cancel culture” or “terrorism.” The conclusion is that explanation and critique are mutually supporting elements of science, and that combined they give us insights we cannot glean from either alone. (shrink)

Academic freedom is seriously under threat. Here I will consider how the marketisation of Higher Education has exacerbated the decline of ‘academic freedom’. While the effects of a ‘cancel culture’ on university provision are difficult to ignore, threats to academic freedom raise a number of questions, such as: ‘who is allowed to speak on campus?’, ‘to whom?’, and ‘about what?’. These questions are fundamental to the academic profession, and therefore have clear implications for teaching and learning in Higher Education. (...) Through an analysis of Netflix’s The Chair (2021), and drawing on the works of Martin Buber, I argue that academics’ freedom to teach is implicitly constrained by student-consumer desires, and in turn this reduces the space for genuine dialogue on university campuses. Rather than closing down debate and the discussion of ‘controversial’ topics, universities instead need to cultivate a climate of trust, openness, and reciprocity on campuses, such that genuine staff-student dialogue can flourish. University campuses are precisely the places where academics should be able to engage in scholarly debate on matters of importance – where students may be exposed to radically different viewpoints and perspectives – and film and TV series can be used to initiate such conversations. (shrink)

Nicht selten wird zum Beispiel in Diskussionen um „Political Correctness“ oder „Cancel Culture“ Kritik an bestimmten Positionen geübt und im Namen der Meinungsfreiheit zugleich Kritik an der eigenen Meinung zurückgewiesen. Offenbar besteht Klärungsbedarf in Bezug darauf, ob und, wenn ja, wann Kritik ebenso wie ihre Zurückweisung berechtigt sind. Hierzu gilt es insbesondere den Zusammenhang eingehender zu betrachten zwischen dem universellen Recht auf Redefreiheit, dessen gesetzlicher Kodifizierung und den ethischen Anforderungen, denen Redebeiträge und deren Kritik unterstehen. In sieben Beiträgen wird (...) aus unterschiedlichen Blickwinkeln das Thema des Schwerpunkts „Redefreiheit und Kritik: Müssen wir alles tolerieren, was andere sagen?“ beleuchtet. Dabei soll auch die öffentliche und nicht nur die akademische Debatte über das Recht auf Rede- bzw. Meinungsfreiheit sowie die normativen Grenzen von Kritik bereichert werden. (shrink)

ABSTRACT In Retaking College Hill: The Adults Are Back, Walter Donway takes us on a tour of a university that has been consumed by low standards and cancel culture. The dean is attempting to protect the university’s standards but is being opposed at every turn, and there is a plot to fi re him. A small group of his supporters try to help him. They face opposition of multiple types, including violence, each step of the way and must skillfully (...) manage the situation. This is a novel of ideas—showing us how philosophy got the university into this mess, and how clear thinking and powerful ideas—such as those of Ayn Rand—can help reverse the trend. (shrink)

This paper critically assesses Chapters 6 and 7 of On Taking Offence. Chapter 6 defends the idea that an inclination to take offence can be a ‘corrective civic virtue’ against threats to social equality. Chapter 7 argues that the practice of taking offence does not change much when we turn to analysing our lives online. With respect to Chapter 6, I argue that the instrumental vindication of offence-taking as a virtue is in tension with arguments earlier in the book, and (...) needs more empirical support. Earlier chapters of the book defend offence-taking as intrinsically apt and justified, regardless of its effects. What is more, if the case for offence-taking is grounded on its effects, then we need solid empirical backing; and an initial obstacle to that might be that the marginalised are probably less likely to be able to produce positive effects through their offence-taking. With regard to Chapter 7, I suggest that McTernan overlooks some potentially relevant differences between real-world and online interactions, which might make the adjustment of our norms to social media interaction more complex than she suggests. (shrink)

“Woke” and cancel culture have become mainstream methods for ideological leftists to express their sense of hopelessness and frustration. And while many agree that improving social harmony is an admirable goal, policing the use of pronouns while carefully maintaining the status quo of capitalism’s production, destruction and inequality does little to address the underlying structural problems that create the conditions for social disharmony. It is on this point that Žižek finds agreement with commentators on the ideological right. But at (...) both ends of the ideological spectrum we find little to hope for. This paper is about what happens when important discussions are hijacked by extremists on both ends of the political spectrum. Surely, there must be more than politically correct totalitarianism and the irrational outbursts of conspiratorial fanatics. As Žižek has long argued, we should, perhaps, hold out for the worst option in the hope that real change might still be possible. I make this case with reference to popular events and culture, and a wide array of Žižek’s scholarly and popular works. (shrink)

This paper begins by contrasting two familiar approaches to truth and justification: realist and anti-realist, in order to indicate, firstly, two important, but diametrically opposed, intuitions they each capture about these notions, and secondly, the epistemological problems they each give rise to: radical scepticism and relativism respectively. It then introduces a third, fallibilist-pragmatist account, which captures each of the important insights of the other two accounts while avoiding their problems. The paper concludes by showcasing how the fallibilist-pragmatist approach differs from (...) both relativism and radical scepticism, and in doing so fares better than they do in navigating the issue of academic freedom and “cancel culture” on college campuses. (shrink)

The #metoo movement has forced many fans to consider what they should do when they learn that a beloved artist has acted immorally. One natural thought is that fans ought to give up the artworks of immoral artists. In Why It's OK to Enjoy the Work of Immoral Artists, Mary Beth Willard argues for a more nuanced view. Enjoying art is part of a well-lived life, so we need good reasons to give it up. And it turns out good reasons (...) are hard to find. Willard show that it's reasonable to believe that most boycotts of artists won't succeed, so most of the time there's no ethical reason to join in. Someone who manages to separate the art from the artist isn't making an ethical mistake by buying and enjoying their art. She then considers the ethical dimensions of canceling artists and so-called "cancel culture," arguing that canceling is ethically risky because it encourages moral grandstanding. Willard concludes by arguing that the popular debate has overlooked the power of art to change our lives for the good. It's of course OK to decide to give up the artwork of immoral artists, but--as Willard shows in this provocative little volume--it's OK to continue to enjoy their art, as well. Key Features Offers accessible discussions of complicated philosophical topics like aesthetic value, collective action problems, and epistemic justice Provides a unique perspective and underexplored argument on the popular issue of cancellation Explores the role of aesthetic value in our lives, including its relation to our ethical decisions and our well being. (shrink)

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. (shrink)

In Le différend Lyotard evocatively describes what remains to be heard as “the silence of feeling.” Setting Lyotard’s différend among a differentiated set of incommensurable family resemblances, including Rancière’s mésentente and Derrida’s différance, this paper argues that le différend même, far from coinciding with itself, points to the re-marks and differs from itself, silencing itself by putting itself under a conditional. This is what gives its particular affective quality that is bound up with address and listening. From this perspective, it (...) also becomes possible to develop a new analysis of the silencing said to constitute “cancel culture,” demonstrating that the marketplace-of-ideas model falsely presupposes a fictional equality of audibility and originary purity of speech. What Lyotard teaches us is that free speech cannot but silence itself. (shrink)

Abstract:This essay explores with the help of the discipline of philosophy of education the educational implications of the practice of canceling individuals or ideas. In particular, it investigates what gets lost or undermined when we cancel various opinions, words, and practices. To advance my argument, I first introduce some basic definitions while analyzing the problem with the notion of cancel culture. Then, I briefly review various historical examples of canceling going back to Socrates. The next part of this (...) paper presents some of the philosophical arguments against canceling and restricting speech made by John Stuart Mill. After presenting Mill’s contentions in favor of liberty of expression, I revisit John Dewey’s conception of democratic association in order to show that the practice of canceling people and ideas is antithetical to Dewey’s dynamic view of democracy. Based on the insights of Mill and Dewey, in the final part I attempt to make an educational case against the practice of canceling. (shrink)

Die Frage moralischer und/oder rechtlicher Grenzen der Meinungsfreiheit, der Grenzen des Sagbaren und Tolerierbaren, stellt zunehmend eine gesellschaftliche und politische Metadebatte dar, in der Versuche, komplexe Phänomene des Aushandelns von Grenzen des Zulässigen bzw. Notwendigen semantisch zu fixieren, von erheblichem Lagerdenken zeugen. Wer von „Politischer Korrektheit“, „Cancel Culture“, „Meinungsdiktatur“ oder „Kontaktschuld“ spricht, steht klar auf der einen Seite, so scheint es; wer von „Diskriminierung“, „Rassismus“, „Hassrede“ oder „weißen Privilegien“ spricht, auf der anderen. Vor dem Hintergrund solch verfestigter Diskursbahnen stellt (...) die Frage, ob wir alles tolerieren müssen, was andere sagen, eine Erwägungsaufgabe dar, die nur mit einem Schritt zurück überhaupt adressierbar ist, will man nicht mit dem Jargon der einen Seite die Anliegen der anderen ausschließen und damit den ungeprüften Eindruck befördern, es handle sich hier tatsächlich um eine unversöhnliche Polarisierung, der die Philosophie nichts hinzuzufügen habe, außer vielleicht ein Lamento oder eine moralische Geste. Der Umweg, über den ich im Folgenden die von dieser Schwerpunktausgabe gestellte Frage behandeln möchte, führt zunächst zu einer Analyse der Ansprüche, die plurale Demokratien an ihre Mitglieder stellen. Diese sind nicht nur grundsätzlich hoch, sondern mitunter auch in sich konfliktträchtig. Konkret betrifft dies die Anforderung an Mitglieder demokratischer Gemeinwesen, sowohl bürgerliche Toleranz zu üben als auch diskursives Engagement als Vorbedingung qualitätsvoller demokratischer Meinungsbildung und Entscheidungsfindung an den Tag zu legen. Die jeweils ‚richtige Mitte‘ lässt sich dann am besten finden, wenn die Risiken zweier Extreme bewusstgemacht werden, die daran geknüpft sind, dass einerseits ein zu hohes Maß an ziviler Toleranz zulasten diskursiven Engagements geht und andererseits ein Mangel an bürgerlicher Toleranz diskursives Engagement gefährdet. Entlang dieser beiden Formen einer verhängnisvollen Dysbalance des demokratischen Ethos möchte ich Grundzüge einer demokratischen Ethik der freien Rede und freien Widerrede herausarbeiten und Implikationen für Grenzen von Meinungsfreiheit bzw. Kritik beleuchten. (shrink)

The relation between art and morality is one of the vexed issues of aesthetics; it has a history at least from Plato and has been written about, or commented on, by most if not all the luminaries in aesthetics—it is not coincidence that one of the most influential papers on these debates is also one of the most cited papers of this journal. Also, the (im)pertinence of moral concerns for the assessment of artworks is arguably one of the most discussed (...) philosophical issues in the public opinion (albeit not always informed by philosophical insights). The prompt for this Special Issue was the publication, over a short space of time, of four books in the area: James Harold’s Dangerous Art: On Moral Criticisms of Artwork (2020), Erich Hatala Matthes’s Drawing the Line: What to Do with the Work of Immoral Artists from Museums to Movies (2022), Ted Nannicelli’s Artistic Creation and Ethical Criticism (2020), and Mary Beth Willard’s Why It’s OK to Enjoy the Art of Immoral Artists (2021). In this issue, each of these authors provides a précis of their own book, a criticism of one of the other books, and then a defence of their own work against this criticism. Although each book is, obviously, very different, there are some overlapping concerns that make for an especially productive interaction. In particular, one thread that runs through is the current vexed issue of what attitude an audience should take on a work of art in the light of facts about the moral character of its creator. With the wars over ‘cancel culture’ raging in the popular discourse, it is important to subject this issue to detailed philosophical examination. (shrink)