Fellows

Prof. Dmitri Nikulin

Professor of Philosophy, The New School for Social Research, New York

August 2019 until October 2019

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Funded by Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt and Kassel-Stiftung in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften


Dmitri Nikulin
is Professor of Philosophy who teaches at the New School for Social Research in New York. His interests range from ancient philosophy and early modern science to the philosophy of memory and philosophy of history.

 

 

 

Research project title:
Responsibility and Hope

Abstract
After the publication of Hans Jonas' Das Prinzip Verantwortung forty years ago, the principle of responsibility has become a key concept in moral and political debates. Yet the unconditional responsibility for the possibility of the existence of future generations – not only of humans, but also of other living beings – is invariably accompanied by the "heuristics of fear," which presupposes imagining the worst-case scenario and a pronouncedly bleak future. The dystopian principle of responsibility was introduced as a response to Bloch's Das Prinzip Hoffnung, which envisions the possibility of a utopian future for humanity. The proposed project will discuss these two principles and will argue that they are not mutually exclusive, so that, while still preserving the imperative of responsibility, one can maintain a utopian ideal as a regulative idea for moral and political action.

List of Recent Publications

Dialectic and Dialogue (2010)
Comedy, Seriously (2014)
The Concept of History (2017)
Critique of Bored Reason (forthcoming with Columbia University Press)

Edited and co-edited collections:
Memory: A History (2015)
Philosophy and Power in Antiquity (2016)
Productive Imagination: Its History, Meaning and Significance (2018)

 

Prof. Thomas P. Crocker

Professor of Law at the University of South Carolina

May 2019 until June 2019

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Thomas Crocker is Professor of Law at the University of South Carolina. He holds a J.D. from Yale Law School, a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Vanderbilt University, and an M.A. in Philosophy from the University of Wales. He has held fellowships as a Visiting Scholar at the American Academy of Arts & Sciences in Cambridge, MA, as a Senior Fulbright Scholar in Germany at the Johann Goethe Universität, Frankfurt am Main, where he was a resident fellow at the Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften, and as the MacCormick Visiting Research Fellow at the University of Edinburgh School of Law. His scholarship focuses on issues in constitutional law and theory, and intersects both law and philosophy. Within constitutional theory, his scholarship addresses issues concerning privacy, free speech and democracy, criminal procedure, presidential power, and constitutional constraints. His book, Overcoming Necessity: Emergency, Constraint, and the Meanings of American Constitutionalism, is forthcoming with Yale University Press.

Research project title:
The Constitution of Ethical Life: Privacy, Community, and the Liberal State

Abstract
I am in the early stages of a monograph project entitled, “The Constitution of Ethical Life: Privacy, Community, and the Liberal State,” that explores how conceptions and practices of privacy are central to constitutionalism, and are therefore central to how legal practices and institutions constitute ethical life within a polity. This project will investigate how constitutional communities shape governing institutions through shifting conceptions of privacy. How has an increased tendency to blur the distinction between state and private commerce—a process of privatization—also accompanied a pervasive loss of personal privacy? Public goods, however these might be defined, are increasingly provided through private entities, closed to ordinary forms of democratic transparency and control. At the same time, everyday private matters are increasingly rendered transparent to both governmental and other private enterprises. On the one hand, political policies translate public goods into private values subject to market exchange and cost benefit logics.  On the other hand, private matters of everyday personal life are subject to surveillance and marketized “datafication” by both governmental bodies and other private entities. As a consequence of these two processes, the status of privacy, of “the private,” is undergoing a transformation that this project seeks to explore.  My exploration of this transformation focuses on the relationship between the constitutive commitments that comprise a shared ethical life and the constitutive understandings that shape a constitutional community.

List of Recent Publications

Overcoming Necessity:  Emergency, Constraint, and the Meanings of American Constitutionalism (Yale University Press, forthcoming 2020).

“Constitutions, Rule Following, and the Crisis of Constraint,” Legal Theory, vol. 24 (2018): 3-39 (with M. Hodges).

“Constitutive Visions: Sovereignty, Necessity, and Saramago’s Blindness,” Constellations, vol. 24 (2017): 63-75.

“Dystopian Constitutionalism,” 18 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, vol. 18 (2015): 593-655.

 

Prof. Sanjay G. Reddy

Professor for Economics, The New School for Social Research, New York

15 June 2019 to 16 August 2019

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften. Funded by Johanna Quandt Foundation

Sanjay G. Reddy is an Associate Professor of Economics at The New School for Social Research.  He has also previously taught at Columbia University, and been a visitor at diverse academic institutions in the US, Europe and India.  He has held fellowships from the Center for Ethics, the Center for Population and Development Studies at Harvard University, the Center for Human Values at Princeton University, the Justitia Amplificata program of the Goethe University of Frankfurt and Free University of Berlin and the Advanced Research Collaborative of the City University of New York.  
Recently he was a member of the Independent High-level Team of Advisers to the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations on the longer-term positioning of the UN Development System (in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development) and has served in various other functions in the United Nations.  He is one of the co-founders of the Global Consumption and Income Project. He holds a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University, an M.Phil. in social anthropology from the University of Cambridge, and an A.B.  in applied mathematics with physics from Harvard University.
For more information see: http://www.sanjayreddy.com/about

Research project title:
The Predicament of Economics

Abstract
During my stay I will investigate the ‘predicament of economics’, in particular the underlying sources of difficulties in establishing agreed upon and ‘law-like’ economic knowledge, and what implications this has for our understanding of the status of economic knowledge and of the role it can or should play in society.
The project thus straddles the methodology, the sociology and politics of social science to ask how and why it is that the discipline, looked to in order to provide answers to pressing questions of social explanation and of policy, often fails to do so in a manner that many could consider to be satisfactory, seemingly characterized by permanent internal conflicts, and the reign of ideology, fads and fashions. The project explores the forces and factors operating on the discipline to deflect or prevent it from better serving its social mission and explores the predicament of economists, asking whether certain debates can ever reasonably expected to be resolved or whether their continuation is a manifestation of politics in another form. If there is a way forward that might permit the discipline to become both more reason-bound and more faithful to society, what is it? (Sanjay G. Reddy)

Publications (selection):

“Inequalities and Identities” (with Arjun Jayadev), in Deprivation, Inequality and Polarization (ed. I. Dasgupta and M. Mitra), 2019, Springer.

“Poverty Beyond Obscurantism” in Beck, V./Hahn, H./Lepenies, R. (Eds.): Dimensions of Poverty. Springer (forthcoming; 2019).

"The Middle Muddle: Conceptualizing and Measuring the Global Middle Class" (with Arjun Jayadev and Rahul Lahoti) in Martin Guzman ed. Toward a Just Society: Joseph Stiglitz and Twenty-First Century Economics, Columbia University Press.

International Trade and Labour Standards: A Proposal for Linkage (with Christian Barry), 2008, New York: Columbia University Press.

 

Events:
Master-Class
Further information will follow

Lucy Jeannette Bermúdez Bermúdez

Magistrada / Bundesrichterin am kolumbianischen Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Consejo de Estado, Colombia)

3. bis 15. November 2018

in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther

Lucy Jeannette Bermúdez Bermúdez studierte Rechtswissenschaften an der Universidad La Gran Colombia (Bogotá) und spezialisierte sich auf Strafrecht und Kriminologie an der Universidad Santo Tomás (Bogotá). Seit 2013 ist sie Bundesrichterin in Kolumbien (Consejo de Estado), wo sie wichtige Prozesse leitete wie zum Beispiel die Nichtigkeitsklage gegen die Ergebnisse der Volksabstimmung für den Frieden in Kolumbien und derzeit die Nichtigkeitsklage gegen die Wahl zum Senat der Republik 2018-2022.  Bevor sie Bundesrichterin wurde, hatte sie verschiedene Positionen als Staatsanwältin inne. Zudem war sie unter anderem Vizepräsidentin der Nationalen Kommission für Kontrolle und Wahlangelegenheiten der Generalstaatsanwaltschaft und Richterin am Nationalen Wahlrat und am Staatsrat. Sie lehrte an verschiedenen Universitäten wie der Universidad Libre de Colombia, dem Colegio Mayor de Nuestra Señora del Rosario und der Universidad Sergio Arboleda. Daneben fungierte sie als Beraterin für Fragen des Wahlrechts, der vertraglichen und außervertraglichen Haftung des Staates, des Disziplinarrechts und der Vermögenshaftung öffentlicher Bediensteter. Lucy Jeannette Bermúdez Bermúdez ist Autorin zahlreicher Artikel und Forschungsarbeiten zu verschiedenen Themen – unter anderem zu Fragen der öffentlichen Verteidigung, der Schlichtung, der Wahlverbrechen, des Wahlprozesses und der Wahlkontrolle.

Forschungsprojekt:
Der Friedensprozess und das demokratische System in Kolumbien: Die Rolle der Wahlgerichtsbarkeit im Postkonflikt

Abstract
Die Unterzeichnung des Endabkommens über die Beendigung des Konflikts und den Aufbau eines stabilen und dauerhaften Friedens zwischen der kolumbianischen Regierung und der FARC Guerrilla führte zu einer Veränderung des Rahmens, in dem sich soziale Konflikte im Land entwickeln.
Die Demokratie ersetzt die Schlachtfelder, auf denen in der Vergangenheit Waffengewalt herrschte, indem sie institutionelle Kanäle zur Lenkung von Protesten und sozialen Forderungen als unabdingbare Voraussetzung für die Aufrechterhaltung von friedlicher Koexistenz innerhalb jeder Gesellschaft wiederherstellt.
Das ist keine geringe Errungenschaft, denn auf diese Weise wurde ein bewaffneter Konflikt beendet, der nicht nur über ein halbes Jahrhundert bestand, sondern auch über 8.376.843 Opfer forderte, die nun alle Wahrheit, Gerechtigkeit, Wiedergutmachung und Nichtwiederholung fordern. Somit wird eine der grausamsten Phasen der kolumbianischen Gewalt beendet, jenes charakteristischen Merkmals der republikanischen Geschichte, das jedoch seinen Ursprung in der Ankunft der spanischen "Eroberer" auf dem Territorium im Jahr 1499 hat.
Der Aufbau und die Festigung des Friedens in Kolumbien läuft also durch die Stärkung des demokratischen Systems als Substitutionssphäre des gewaltsamen Konflikts; das Ziel der "Demokratischen Öffnung zur Schaffung des Friedens" (als zweitem Aspekt des Abkommens von Havanna) befördert nicht nur die quantitative Erweiterung, sondern die grundlegende Qualifizierung (Vertiefung) dieser demokratischen Öffnung über Wahlen hinaus, indem es die Qualität derjenigen, die sich in der Vergangenheit außerhalb der zivilgesellschaftlichen Sphäre befanden, als politische Subjekte anerkennt.
Diese beiden Ansätze - Erweiterung und Qualifizierung - des demokratischen Prinzips realisieren sich mit der Unterzeichnung des Friedenspakts einerseits durch die Verstärkung von affirmativen Maßnahmen mit geschlechtsspezifischem Fokus, die zu einer gewissen politische Gleichheit der  Geschlechter führen, und andererseits, durch die Schaffung eines normativen Rahmens, den Status quo des Wahlregimes verändert, indem er unter anderem die Kosten der Gründung von politischen Parteien und Bewegungen verringert, die Entstehung neuer Wahlbehörden befördert und die Ausübung politischer Opposition reguliert.
Diese Änderungen des kolumbianischen Wahlregimes stellen die Wahlgerichtsbarkeit vor neue Herausforderungen, deren Aufgabe es in diesem neuen Szenario sein wird, das "Bollwerk" des Abkommens - nämlich das demokratische Prinzip - zu schützen. Einerseits soll sie die Einhaltung der Verpflichtungen zu einer geschlechtlich gleichberechtigten Demokratie garantieren, und andererseits muss sie sich an die neuen rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen anpassen.
Die Demokratie wird zum Epizentrum für den Aufbau eines stabilen und dauerhaften Friedens, und die Rolle des Wahlrichters muss gerade darin bestehen, die Mindestbedingungen für ihre Umsetzung aufrechtzuerhalten, so dass sich in diesem friedlichen Kontext soziale Forderungen entwickeln können, die sich in der Vergangenheit des Kriegs als Protestmittel bedient haben. Die Funktion der Wahlgerichtsbarkeit zeigt sich damit primär in der Erhaltung der Voraussetzungen für die Ausübung der Demokratie, als Grundlage für die Entwicklung einer politischen Debattenkultur, wie sie charakteristisch ist für das Übergangsregime, das die Unterzeichnung des Abkommens begründete.
Der Wahlrichter ist Garant für die Forderungen, die sich aus der Unterzeichnung des Abkommens von Havanna ergeben und auf das demokratische System des Landes auswirken, so dass seine Rechtsprechung zweifellos über den justiziellen Bereich hinausgehen und die politische Dynamik - ihre Ausübung und Konsolidierung - beeinflussen wird.
Die Wahrung der Demokratie ist jedoch keine exklusive Aufgabe dieser spezialisierten Gerichtsbarkeit, sondern erstreckt sich vielmehr auf verschiedene Justizorgane in Kolumbien, insbesondere auf die Sondergerichtsbarkeit für den Frieden, die durch den Havanna-Pakt geschaffen wurde. Deren Aufgabe ist die Untersuchung und Aburteilung von Verbrechen während des bewaffneten Bürgerkrieges, wobei eine Verurteilung die politische Partizipation der Verurteilten nicht ausschließt oder einschränkt.
Die Konstruktion des Abkommens wird also als Schlüssel für die Demokratie verstanden - als Grundwerterahmen, der von den Wahlrichtern zu wahren ist, aber in gleicher Form auch von der entstehenden Gerichtsbarkeit, die für die Übergangsinstrumente zuständig ist.

Veranstaltungen:
Donnerstag, 8. November 2018, 18 Uhr
Öffentlicher Vortrag: Der Friedensprozess und das demokratische System in Kolumbien: Die Rolle der Wahlgerichtsbarkeit im Postkonflikt
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Freitag, 9. November 2018, 13.45 Uhr
Vortrag im Seminar „Zeitgenössisches politisches Denken“ an der American University of Paris
The Peace Process and Democratic System in Colombia: The Role of Electoral Jurisdiction in Post-Conflict Situations
Weitere Informationen: Hier....

Mittwoch, 14. November 2018, 14 Uhr
Vortrag im Ibero-Amerikanischen Kolloquium am Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht
Der Friedensprozess in Kolumbien. Fortschritt und Herausforderungen aus der Sicht des Staatsrates
Weitere Informationen: Hier....

Prof. Dr. Norbert Frei

Professor für Neuere und Neueste Geschichte an der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena und Leiter des Jena Center Geschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts

1. November 2018 bis 28. Februar 2019

in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Sybille Steinbacher

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.


Prof. Dr. Norbert Frei ist Lehrstuhlinhaber für Neuere und Neueste Geschichte an der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena und Leiter des Jena Center Geschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Von 1979 bis 1997 war er wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am Institut für Zeitgeschichte in München, danach bis 2005 Lehrstuhlinhaber für Neuere und Neueste Geschichte an der Ruhr-Universität Bochum.
Prof. Frei hatte zahlreiche Fellowships und Gastprofessuren inne, so unter anderem an der Harvard University, am Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, am Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton und an der Hebrew University Jerusalem. 2010/11 war er Theodor-Heuss-Professor an der New School for Social Research in New York.
Er gehörte mehreren Historikerkommissionen an, so der Unabhängigen Kommission zur Erforschung der Geschichte des Hauses Bertelsmann und der 2005 von Joschka Fischer eingesetzten Kommission zur Geschichte des Auswärtigen Amts.

Forschungsprojekt:
“Niemand will Nazi gewesen sein”. Die Nachgeschichte des Dritten Reiches
(“Nobody wants to have been a Nazi.” The Aftermath of the Third Reich)

Abstract
Bei der im Entstehen begriffenen Monographie handelt es sich um den letzten Band der siebenbändigen Reihe  “Die Deutschen und der Nationalsozialismus", die seit 2015 im Verlag  C.H. Beck München unter der Herausgeberschaft von Norbert Frei erscheint.

Publikationen (Auswahl):

Der Führerstaat. Nationalsozialistische Herrschaft 1933 bis 1945. Zuerst erschienen 1987, in 13 Sprachen übersetzt, 8. Auflage München 2013

Vergangenheitspolitik. Die Anfänge der Bundesrepublik und die NS-Vergangenheit. (= Habilitationsschrift 1996) 4. Auflage München 2012

1945 und wir. Das Dritte Reich im Bewußtsein der Deutschen. München 2005, erweiterte 4. Auflage München 2009

1968. Jugendrevolte und globaler Protest. München 2008 (erweiterte und aktualisierte Neuausgabe 2017, 2. Auflage 2018)

Veranstaltungen:

24. Januar 2019, 18.30 Uhr
Öffentlicher Vortrag
"Niemand will Nazi gewesen sein." Überlegungen zur Nachgeschichte des "Dritten Reiches"
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

25. Januar 2019, 9-13 Uhr
Masterclass
Die Deutschen und die NS-Vergangenheit seit 1945 Verweigerung, Engagement und Ermüdung im „Erinnerungsdienst“
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

25. Februar 2019, 19.30 Uhr
Buchpräsentation
Zur rechten Zeit: Wider die Rückkehr des Nationalismus
Mit Dr. Christina Morina (Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena), Dr. Franka Maubach (Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena) und Dr. Maik Tändler (Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena)
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

 

Prof. Awet T. Weldemichael

Queen’s National Scholar and Associate Professor of African and World History, Queen’s University (Kingston, Ontario)

September - October 2018

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir

Funded by Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften


Awet T. Weldemichael is Associate Professor and Queen’s National Scholar in the History Department at Queen’s University and an Associate of the Indian Ocean World Center at McGill University. He holds a Ph.D. in History from UCLA. He is the author of Third World Colonialism and Strategies of Liberation (Cambridge, 2013), among other scholarly and policy publications. He has previously held teaching and research positions at African, European and U.S. universities, and worked for international organizations. He researches contemporary history and political economy of Northeast Africa.

Research project title:
Eritrea from the birth of its liberation movement in 1961 to the present

Abstract
My project is a study of contemporary Eritrea from the birth of its liberation movement in 1961 to the present. It aims to examine and better understand the origins of its current political system and the source of its sociopolitical malaise. Consistent with the Cluster of Excellence "Normative Orders", it interrogates the worldviews, ideologies, declared visions and oft-repeated rationalizations of the liberation movement-cum-government through an in-depth documentation of the experiences of its leaders and rank-and-file. (Awet T. Weldemichael)

Publications (selection):

Piracy in Somalia: Violence and Development in the Horn of Africa (Cambridge University Press, forthcoming).

“The Law of the Sea and Il/Legal Fishing in Somalia,” The Nautilus IX (Spring 2018): 29-52.

African Liberation Theology: Intergenerational Conversations on Eritrea’s Futures co-authored with Ghirmai Negash (Red Sea Press, 2018).

“Formative Alliances of Northeast African Insurgents: the Eritrean Liberation Movement and the Ethiopian Armed Opposition between the 1970s and 1990s,” Northeast African Studies, Vol. 14, No.1 (2014), 83-122.

 

Events:
Further information will follow

Betcy Jose, PhD

Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Colorado Denver

January 2019 until April 2019

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Nicole Deitlehoff

Funded by Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften


Betcy Jose is an associate professor in the political science department at the University of Colorado Denver. Relying on her law degree and PhD, she studies human security, global norms, and international humanitarian law. Her current projects explore how civilians protect themselves in war, the emergence of illiberal norms and their suppression using the practice of targeted killings as a case study, and contestation in the norm of humanitarian intervention.

Research project title:
Russia as a Norm Contester and Norm Entrepreneur (Project Expose Betcy Jose and Christoph Stefes)

Abstract
A recent version of humanitarian intervention is the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine. It sanctions nonintervention norm violations if military force is a measure of last resort and the United Nations Security Council approves the intervention.  However, with the 2014 Crimea episode, Russia seemingly not only challenged R2P but also offered an alternative framework to permissibly engage in a country’s domestic affairs.  This project scrutinizes these endeavors in two ways.  First, it will explore how the international community reacted to Russia’s justifications for its Crimean intervention, inquiring into who rejected them, who accepted them, and why.  Second, it will theorize why Russia embarked on this effort to challenge this global norm.  In doing so, the project will investigate the role of ideas and values in contributing to a country’s overall power status.
Through these endeavors, this project strives to advance our understanding of how global norms are created and modified.  By investigating the impact of Russian humanitarian arguments on the international rules permitting violations of sovereignty norms, this project contributes to a wide array of literatures such as the literatures on the international dimension of authoritarian regimes, post-Soviet area studies, and global norms.  It advances the debate about the various measures that powerful authoritarian regimes undertake to promote their foreign policy goals and what those goals may be. Recent studies of the foreign policies of powerful authoritarian regimes assume that these regimes largely support authoritarian elites and undermine democratic rule in their surrounding countries. In pursuing these rather narrow foreign policy goals, scholars claim large authoritarian regimes rely primarily on material resources (economic and military assets) to either topple unfriendly regimes or support friendly authoritarian leaders.  However, this project suggests that authoritarian regimes may also have more ambitious agendas such as determining the rules governing the entire community of states.  And they may pursue these goals via the use of argumentation and at great material costs. Yet much of this literature claims that if powerful authoritarian countries do proffer any normative rhetoric for their actions, these are a cynical means to further material interests. Students of authoritarian regimes therefore neglect the possibility that these regimes might advance normative goals in addition to their economic and security agendas.
As far as the IR field is concerned, the project speaks to the burgeoning literature on norm contestation. First, by investigating whether Russia is acting as a norm advocate, this project expands our understandings of which actors can play this role and how they comparatively function. Much of the existing research on norms typically explores how non-state actors (i.e., organizations like Human Rights Watch) introduce and promote new normative ideas.  How do state norm entrepreneurs compare to their better-studied non-state counterparts?  Second, this project contributes to the norms literature by inquiring into the promotion of norms under-examined by norms scholars: normative content that does not reflect liberal values.  For instance, the norms literature typically focuses on norms that promote civil and political rights and democracy.  Yet, the concept of norms does not require a particular valence, but a sense of “oughtness” for whatever behavior they regulate.  Thus, the type of humanitarian intervention promoted by Russia could qualify as a norm.  Third, much of the extant norms literature tends to have a directional bias: norms originate in the West and from there, diffuse to the rest of the international community.  By examining Russia has a potential normative source, this project attempts to partially remedy this bias by offering a more inclusive perspective to the study of norms.  It also expands our understanding of the sources of power that enable states to shape global relations.  Much important research has been conducted on how military strength and wealth provide some countries more global influence than others.  Less is known about how accumulating the power to persuade rhetorically for non-material goals correlates with the amount of influence a state has on this stage.
This project’s significance is not limited to scholars in an array of different fields.  This project’s findings will also be of great interest to policymakers.  By exploring how Russia tries to shape global norms, the project offers policymakers a more nuanced understanding of an important actor in the international arena.  Russia is often portrayed in caricature in foreign policy circles: a bewildering country whose primary motivation is to be a thorn in the side of Western powers.  Like many caricatures, there is some truth to this image.  However, by revealing new dimensions to Russia’s motivations and modus operandi, this project offers decision-makers additional insights and tools with which to interact with Russia.
The phase of the research project to be undertaken at PRIF will further scrutinize an original dataset my collaborator, Dr. Christoph Stefes, and I created during the project’s first phase.  This dataset contains over 600 news articles capturing Russian justifications for its Ukrainian intervention and global reactions to them. We also coded the articles using Atlas.ti software.  Additionally, we examined the toll this intervention took on Russia’s material interests, namely its economy and security.  Our analysis (to be published as a working paper by the German Institute for Global and Area studies) indicates that the Crimea intervention hurt these interests and that Russia foresaw these effects.  We thus concluded that Russia’s humanitarian justifications were aimed not to advance its material interests but to further its normative goals of contesting the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine.  The next phase of the project will more deeply examine why some states accepted this Russian challenge to R2P and why others rejected it via two steps. First, we will conduct semi-structured interviews with various countries’ decision-makers and experts.  Due to time and budget constraints, we will focus on respondents from just four countries identified from the project’s first phase: the United Kingdom (which opposed Russia), Kazakhstan (which supported Russia), and Germany (mixed)  The specific respondents will be determined via a snowball sampling technique. Second, we will analyze these interview data, along with relevant portions of our news-article dataset, with the Atlas.ti software.  Atlas.ti will enable us to determine patterns between the codes applied to the data that will help us shed light on this project’s research questions.  For instance, it allows us to determine co-occurrence rates.  These statistics tell us how often multiple codes appear together, providing us some interpretive guidance when examining different countries’ positions regarding Russia’s normative contestation.  In this way, our project employs both quantitative and qualitative approaches.  We will also use this data to help us theorize Russia’s possible broader motivation for its Crimean action: the pursuit of a source of power that differs from hard and soft power, namely a type of normative power.

To get to the blog post "What’s a War Crime Gotta Do To Get Some Attention?" click here...

Publications (selection):

2018: “Russian Norm Entrepreneurship in Crimea – Serious Contestation or Cheap Talk?” with Christoph Stefes.  German Institute for Global and Area Studies Working Paper Series.

2018: Norm Contestation: Insights into Non-Conformity within Armed Conflict Norms: Springer Publishing.

2017: “Not Completely the New Normal: How Human Rights Watch Tried to Suppress the Targeted Killing Norm.” Contemporary Security Policy. Winner of the 2018 Bernard Brodie Prize.
 
2017: “Bin Laden’s Targeted Killing and Emerging Norms.”  Critical Studies on Terrorism, 10:1, 44-66.
 
2016:  “Civilian Self-Protection and Civilian Targeting in Armed Conflicts: Who Protects Civilians?” with Peace Medie. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics (http://politics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-216)

 

Events:
Fellowkolloquium
Russia as a Norm Contester and Norm Entrepreneur
28 February 2019, 11 am. For further information: Click here...

Dr. Heloise Weber

Senior Lecturer in International Relations and Development, School of Political Science and International Studies, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia

18 June until 15 September 2018

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Gunther Hellmann

Funded by Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften


Heloise Weber's main research interests are in the Global Politics of Development/Critical Development Studies, Global/International Political Economy (GPE/IPE), and Critical Approaches to International Relations (IR), all grounded in an interest in politics of deprivation and discrimination. To these she brings a keen interest in the political histories and relations of colonialism, the politics of representation, decolonizing thought, and questions of regulation, power and resistance. These interests have informed her theoretical and methodological outlooks, and led her to engage with the politics of comparative method(s), meta-theoretical questions around relational analysis, and historical legacies in contemporary contradictions of development. Her publications have covered social and political analyses of development and poverty reduction strategies and their implications, critical evaluations of global governance frameworks, engagements with Human Security as an approach to development, and theoretical as well as methodological issues in IR/IPE and the Global Politics of Development.

Research project title:
Human Rights and Global Development

Research abstract:
In line with my research interests in the politics of global development and inequalities (understood as a historically constituted global project/ world politics), I have over the past couple of years been developing a research project on Human Rights (HR) and Global  Development. My preliminary research findings suggest that there are some quite significant tensions in the emerging HR and Global Development framework. This is most evident with regard to the privileging of rights that align with global commercial and investment (including free trade) law as justiciable rights. Increasingly trade law (lex mercatoria) is aligned with development law. The 2030 Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs] agenda is the most recent high-level international development framework also adopted as a United Nations Resolution. This particular alignment of HR and Global Development could potentially result in further conflict as life sustaining needs such as water, food, shelter (to name a few) are no longer conceived as universal entitlements. Instead, their realisation is now tethered to the question of ‘trade law’, which is increasingly the domain of justiciable rights. For instance, this concerns the protection of new forms of investment law as property law as provided for under the General Agreement of Trade in Services of the World Trade Organisation [WTO]. This emerging global framing of HR and Global Development occurs arguably at a historically unique conjuncture and one that has also been subject to crucial challenges, ethically, socially and politically (see, for instance, the recent rise of social movement politics).

Furthermore Dr. Heloise Weber is working on the Collaborative Research Project: "Namibian-German Relations and Normative Challenges: Beyond the Constrictions of International Development and International Relations?" with Prof. Dr. Gunther Hellmann and Dr. Martin Weber.
For further information: Click here...

Publications (selection):

Books (Co-Authored)
2014. Mark T. Berger and Heloise Weber, Rethinking the Third World- International Development and World Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave). *This book is published in the ‘Rethinking World Politics Series’ with Prof. Michael Cox (LSE) the Series Editor.

Books (Edited)
2014. The Politics of Development – A Survey (London: Routledege).
2011/2013. Mark T. Berger and Heloise Weber. War, Peace and Progress in the 21st Century: Development, Violence and Insecurity (London: Routledge). *This co-edited volume is a reprinted version of a Special Issue of Third World Quarterly, April 2010, 30(1).
2007/2013. Mark T. Berger and Heloise Weber. Recognition and Redistribution- Beyond International Development (London: Routledge). *This co-edited volume is a reprinted version of a Special Issue of Globlalizations, 2007, 4(4).

Articles (refereed)
2018. ‘Deprivation and Discrimination: Politics of “Political” Analysis’, contribution to the ‘Collective Discussion: Diagnosing the Present’ with R.J.B. Walker, Robbie Shilliam and Gitte Du Plessis.  International Political Sociology, 12(1): 88-107. https://academic.oup.com/ips/article/12/1/88/4897847
2017. ‘Politics of “Leaving No One Behind”: Contesting the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals’. Globalizations, 14(3): 399-414.
2015. ‘Is IPE just ‘boring’ or committed to problematic meta-theoretical assumptions? A critical engagement with the politics of method’. Contexto Internacional: Journal of Global Connections, 37 (3): 913-943.
2007. ‘A Political Analysis of the Formal Comparative Method: Historicizing the Globalization and Development Debate’, Globalizations, 4 (4): 559-572.

Book chapters (refereed)
2016. The political significance of Bandung for development: challenges, contradictions and struggles for justice. In Quynh N. Pham and Robbie Shilliam (Ed.), Meanings of Bandung: postcolonial orders and decolonial visions (pp. 153-164) London, United Kingdom: Rowman & Littlefield.
2016. From land grabs to food sovereignty. In Jan Aart Scholte, Lorenzo Fioramonti and Alfred G. Nhema (Ed.), New rules for global justice: structural redistribution in the global economy (pp. 109-124) London, United Kingdom: Rowman & Littlefield.
2016. Gender and microfinance/microcredit. In Jill Steans and Daniela Tepe-Belfrage (Ed.), Handbook on gender in world politics (pp. 430-437) Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar.
2013. ‘Global Politics of Human Security’. In Mustapha K Pasha (ed.), Globalisation, Difference and Human Security (London: Routledge), pp. 27-37.

Events:
Fellowkolloquium
Namibian-German Relations and Normative Challenges: Beyond the Constrictions of International Development and International Relations?
28 June 2018, 11 am. For further information: Click here...

Seminar
"De-centring IR: Towards the Critique of Global Development and Political Ecology"
2 - 6 July 2018, at Goethe-University. For further information: Click here...

Masterclass

"De-centring IR: Towards the Critique of Global Development and Political Ecology"
3 July 2018, 10 am - 4.30 pm at Goethe-University. For further information: Click here...

 

Dr. Martin Weber

Senior Lecturer in International Relations, School of Political Science and International Studies, POLSIS, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia

18 June until 15 September 2018

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Gunther Hellmann

Funded by Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften


Martin Weber's main research clusters are in International Social and Political Theory, and in PE/IPE. In the former field, his work has focussed on the contributions of Critical Theory to developments in normative International Political Theory, and to the 'social turn' in IR theory in general. His research in this field, which overlaps with his interests in International Political Economy, has been published in key journals (European Journal of International Relations, Review of International Studies, Alternatives, Globalizations), as well as in contributions to edited volumes. In PE/IPE, his work has focussed on the political analysis of global governance, and in particular on global health governance and global environmental governance. The former deals with competing political visions and agencies regarding health care provision, the latter specifically on problems of integrating trade- and environmental governance. He is currently finishing on a monograph on 'Critical Theory and Global Political Ecology.

Research project title:
Moral Grammars in International Political Theory: Beyond positionalist methods and analytics

Research abstract:
This project builds on a series of research articles (Weber, 2012; 2014A; 2014B, 2015) that have dealt with different aspects of the social-philosophical implications of IR theory’s turn to sociological analytical inventories under the constructivist heading. In this paper, I take some of the insights and criticisms developed in the previous work further, and into the direction of explicating the contours of a relationally reconceptualised International Political Theory. The article comprises three main parts: The critical-reconstructive first part traces the implications of what I call the positional orientation of classical political theory in IR theorizing; focusing on the construal of ‘rule’ in this mode, I demonstrate how the positional orientation structures both, mainstream constructivist research outlooks, as well as a surprisingly wide range of heterodox approaches.
The second part of the article deals with the literature that has registered some discontent with this, focusing specifically on attempts to pad out the register of recognition, more reflexive approaches to questions of legitimacy, and instances of the increasingly more self-conscious deployment in International Political Theory of the language of the relational. Again focusing on how ‘rule’ is construed in such contexts, I show that by failing to explicate the constrictive conceptual implications carried along, these attempts too fall short of making good on the promises of relational analysis.
The third part spells through the constructive possibilities of construing ‘rule’ on the basis of a more thoroughly conceptualized relational political theory. To make such a move plausible, I draw on the social-ontological premises underpinning recognition-theory.

Research project title:
Valuing Nature: Political Economy and Politics of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB).

Research abstract:
The 2007 Potsdam G8+5 Summit provided the platform for Environment Ministers from the participating governments to call for analytical tools to assess the economic value implications of biodiversity, and ecological systems integrity. In response, the TEEB was created, with the objective to provide a comprehensive approach to “recognizing, demonstrating and capturing” the value(s) of biomes (ecosystems) and biodiversity. An ambitious framework, built on explicated premises about economy and ecology, the TEEB is currently in its ‘mainstreaming’ phase (III), aimed at implementing the tools developed through its pilot studies at project and country-policy level.
In this article, I first situate the TEEB within the broader context of initiatives aimed at establishing, strengthening, and mainstreaming what I frame as elements of an aspirational ‘Global Ecological Economic Governance” (e.g. the World Bank’s WAVE and WAVE+ approaches, Natural Capital Accounting, etc.). I argue that the TEEB, due to the more self-consciously conceptual approach it takes, in comparison with the more incrementalist ones typical in this field to date, provides an opportunity to critically investigate the limitations of the proposed valuing tools, the policies they engender, and political ecological implications they may inadvertently produce.
I demonstrate the latter with examples from agricultural biodiversity trends, and conclude by demonstrating the TEEB approach fails to take adequately into account both, the ecological and the political conditions of co-producing valuing.

Furthermore Dr. Martin Weber is working on the Collaborative Research Project: "Namibian-German Relations and Normative Challenges: Beyond the Constrictions of International Development and International Relations?" with Prof. Dr. Gunther Hellmann and Dr. Heloise Weber.
For further information: Click here...

Publications (selection):
- Weber, Martin (2015) On the history and politics of the social turn. Review of International Studies, 41 4: 693-714. doi:10.1017/S0260210515000200
- Devetak, Richard, Kaempf, Sebastian and Weber, Martin (2013) Conversations in International Relations: interview with Andrew Linklater. International Relations, 27 4: 481-505. doi:10.1177/0047117813502504
- Weber, Martin (2013) As if 'relations' mattered: how to subvert positional bias in social science with a lot of help from 'others'. Global Discourse: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Current Affairs and Applied Contemporary Thought. doi:10.1080/23269995.2013.805513
- Mols, Frank and Weber, Martin (2013) Laying sound foundations for social identity theory-inspired European Union attitude research: beyond attachment and deeply rooted identities. Journal of Common Market Studies, 51 3: 505-521. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5965.2012.02316.x
- Weber, Martin (2013) 'It's over; I've seen it on TV': Occupy's politics beyond media spectacle. Global Change, Peace and Security, 25 1: 123-126. doi:10.1080/14781158.2013.758094
- Weber, Martin (2013) Between "isses" and "oughts": IR constructivism, Critical Theory, and the challenge of political philosophy. European Journal of International Relations, 20 2: 516-543. doi:10.1177/1354066112466573
- Weber, Martin (2012) Review of Applying political theory: Issues and debates. Political Science, 64 1: 84-85. doi:10.1177/0032318712442175
- Weber, Martin (2012) Ontologies, depth, and otherwise: Critical notes on Wight's meta-theoretical proposal of a scientific realist IR. Review of International Studies, 38 1: 223-234. doi:10.1017/S0260210511000659

Events:
Fellowkolloquium
Namibian-German Relations and Normative Challenges: Beyond the Constrictions of International Development and International Relations?
28 June 2018, 11 am. For further information: Click here...

Seminar
"De-centring IR: Towards the Critique of Global Development and Political Ecology"
2 - 6 July 2018, at Goethe-University. For further information: Click here...

Masterclass
"Political Ecology and World Politics"
5 July 2018, 9.30 am - 12 pm and 6 July 2018, 2.30 pm - 5 pm at Goethe-University. For further information: Click here...

Namibian-German Relations and Normative Challenges: Beyond the Constrictions of International Development and International Relations?

Prof. G. Hellmann, Dr H. Weber & Dr M. Weber: Collaborative Research Project

Over the past two decades, German colonial history, its continuing legacies, and the question of its selective marginalization in post-WWII German political discourse have finally received sustained and detailed attention among historians and social scientists. In this context, Namibia, and the Genocide committed by German Schutztruppen against Ovaherero and Nama, has rightly been a central focus in such efforts. Comprising the first Genocide of the 20th century (Mamdani, 2001: 31; between 24000 and 100000 Herero and around 10000 Nama were killed), and the first use of concentration camps as extermination camps, German colonialism in Namibia constitutes a particularly dark chapter in German history, and a significant ongoing moral challenge for contemporary relations. Partly as a result of this, German foreign policy towards Namibia has attracted increasing interest as questions of how relations with the descendants of the survivors of genocide should be conducted (in contrast, for instance, with the relative disinterest in relations with the descendants of former German colonial subjects for instance in the Pacific or China).
Our project builds on this research, and in particular on the well-developed theme of the continuous ‘entangled histories’ of Namibians and Germans (Koessler, 2008), the inequalities that continue to be reproduced through these, and on more recent attempts to consider what this means for the practice(s) of (German) foreign policy and “development assistance”. With that literature, we understand the current political relationships between Germany, Namibia, and Germans and Namibians to be fraught by inequalities and inequities linked to biases, silences, elisions, erasures, and complicities (Roos & Seidl, 2015). The normative dimensions of Namibian-German relations (and beyond) are thus inadvertently central, and have been raised specifically by Namibian efforts aimed at contesting the registers of normalcy and normalization that have characterized German foreign policy and “development assistance” approaches. The latter has occurred despite more general public concessions that Namibia deserves special attention because of Germany’s transgressions and influence during, and their continuing legacies after, colonialism (Koessler, 2008) . Adding to the findings of this literature, though, we ask in what ways the conventional institutional scripts of international relations and international development, and their reflections in the social science disciplines that deal with them, are implicated in rendering any political progress towards addressing the clear normative demands inherent in the relationships as if such a project were unrealistic or unrealizable. At the same time, the dominance of these institutional scripts also provides the backdrop for the perpetuation of particular interests, the empowerment of specific actors, and the justifications for both. Thus, for instance, despite the insistence of German officials on the exceptional volumes of aid and support to Namibia, there seems little concern for persistent gross inequalities (generally, see UNDP, 2016. UNDP-NNPC, 2015; also land-ownership, where around 4000 white families, one quarter of them German, own 44% of the land; Jamfa, 2008: 207). At the same time, German aid to Namibia more often than not reflects the quite unexceptional practice of ‘tied-aid’, as indicated for instance by the flagship Ohorongo Cement Factory project, which is in fact an exclusively owned subsidiary of the German family enterprise Schwenk (see KFW-DEG: 2011).
To investigate this constellation, our project contrasts reconstructive analysis of the impasses in Namibian-German relations (reflected in the inequalities reproduced through them), with a counterfactual account of plausible and possible engagements focused on a politics of restorative relations. Though the latter is absent in the case of German-Namibian relations, it is not as if German political discourse, or indeed foreign policy has no practical experience of it grounded in moral commitments. This is clearly writ large in German foreign policy and public political culture engaging in repertoires consistent with restorative relations with regard to the legacies of Holocaust; it comprises remembrance and memorialization, restitution in the form of compensation for loss, or return of property, public visibility of Jewish religious, cultural, political and social affairs rendered in relation with German responsibility and responsiveness, public support and funding for continuing education programs about the Shoa, comprehensive presence in School education explaining and debunking the race-theories that underpinned National Socialist ideology, and restraint in criticisms combined with a solidarist assistance stance in foreign policy making.
Despite the socio-economic and political importance of the relationship with Namibia for Germany, there has been little effort to rethink the terrain upon which the debates have been conducted, or the relationship shaped. The question of colonialism and its legacies must be evaluated from a frame of reference that goes beyond entangled histories, in ways that can explicitly open up engagement of established analytical frames of reference and the practices these enable. For instance, in contrast to German-Jewish relations, the Namibian descendants of victims from the earlier Genocide perpetrated by the German military have not experienced comparable repertoires of restorative relation¬-building. It is noteworthy that German-Jewish relations were firmly grounded in eliding the ‘foreign-domestic’ divide, in ways that do not obtain in the context of Namibian relations.  Our project probes the question why this is so, using the counter-factual model of restorative relations approaches not tethered to the script of performing normal foreign policy and development assistance. We thus problematize the hold that practices of methodological nationalism, comparativism, and stages-logics continue to have on even critical work about colonialism and decolonization in the context of Namibia.  This logic is at the core of the reproduction of inadequate normative registers, and the problematic practices we have identified above from ‘foreign policy’ capture by nationalistic fragments to the pervasiveness of ‘tied aid’.
In sum, our project examines an important substantive case in the history of development, drawing out the significance of colonialism and its legacies for emerging or ‘prevented’ normative orders. The construal of the postcolonial context in accordance with the formal comparative method serves to disarticulate, as well as justify the conditioning of the perpetuation of inequalities in continuing alignment with colonial logics of race in development. This case, we argue, comprehensively puts the question of foreign policy on the line by returning it to its normative paradoxes.

Co-Authored Research Article targeted at European Journal of International Relations or Review of International Studies.

References:

Jamfa, L. (2008) “Germany faces colonial history in Namibia: A very ambiguous “I am sorry”.” In Gibeny, M (ed) The Age of Apology: Facing up to the Past. Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press; 202-215.

KFW-DEG (2011) “Deutsche Zementproduktion in Namibia gestarted”. Available at http://entwicklungspolitik-online.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6928:deutsche-zementproduktion-in-namibia-gestartet&catid=45&Itemid=90 (accessed Feb 10, 2018).

Koessler, R. (2008) “Entangled history and politics: Negotiating the past between Germany and Namibia.” Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 26:3; 313-339.

Koessler, R. (2010) “Images of History and the Nation: Namibia and Zimbabwe Compared.” South African Historical Journal 62:1; 29-53.

Mamdani, M. (2001) “A Brief History of Genocide”. Transition 10:3; 26-47.

Roos, U. & Seidl, T.  (2015) “Im ‘Suedwesten’ nichts Neues? Eine Analyse der deutschen Namibiapolitik als Beitrag zur Rekonstruktion der aussenpolitischen Identitaet des deutschen Nationalstaats”. Zeitschrift fuer Friedens- und Konfliktforschung 4:2; 182-224.

UNDP (2016) “Human Development for Everyone- Briefing note for countries on the 2016 Human Development Report: Namibia”.
Available at hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/NAM.pdf (accessed Feb 11, 2018)

UNDP-NNPC (2015) Poverty and Deprivation in Namibia 2015. Windhoek: National Planning Comission.

Prof. Dr. Jim Ritter

Prof. Dr. Jim Ritter (Institut de Mathématiques de Jussieu–Paris Rive Gauche, Sorbonne Université, CNRS; Equipe: Histoire des Sciences Mathématiques) is a historian of science. His research focuses on the history of rational practices in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia and on the history of general relativity and unified theories.

April 2018

In collaboration with Prof. Dr. Annette Warner (Imhausen)

Funded by The Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften.


The Historian of Science and Physicist Jim Ritter is an emeritus professor of the Université de Paris 8 (Saint-Denis), where he taught at the Département de Mathématiques from 1994 to 2011. Since 2009, he is an Associate Researcher at the Institut de mathématiques de Jussieu-Paris Rive Gauche, Sorbonne Université, Paris (France). His research focuses on the history of rational practices in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia and on the history of general relativity and unified theories.

Research project title:
Algorithmic knowledge in Egypt and Mesopotamia

Research abstract:
This project aims to construct a database for ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian mathematical problem texts, as a tool for the further development of an algorithmic approach to the study of such corpora; an approach initiated by Jim Ritter and further developed in collaboration with Annette Imhausen. The algorithmic approach, which by means of a linguistic and logical analysis of the solution algorithms represented by several hundred Mesopotamian and Egyptian examples, lends itself particularly well to a systematic approach to the full collection of texts, permitting searches for patterning in sequences of operators both within a given corpus and between corpora; hence the interest in a full database with both linguistic and mathematical information.

Selected Publications:
„Science and Reason in Ancient Mesopotamia“, in: Xavier Faivre, Brigitte Lion and Cécile Miches (eds.): Et il y eut un esprit dans l’Homme. Jean Bottéro et la Mésopotamie. Paris: De Boccard (2009): 83-103.
„Geometry as Physics: Oswald Veblen and the Princeton School“, in: Karl-Heinz Schlote and Martina Schneider (eds.), Mathematics meets Physics. Frankfurt a.M.: Harri Deutsch (2011): 145-179.
„Otto Neugebauer and Ancient Egypt“, in: Alexander Jones, Christine Proust and John Steele (eds.), A Mathematician’s Journeys: Otto Neugebauer and Modern Transformations of Ancient Science. New York: Springer (2015): 127-163.
„Translating Babylonian Mathematical Problem Texts“, in: Annette Imhausen und Tanja Pommerening (eds.): Translating Writings of Early Scholars in the Ancient Near East, Egypt, Greece, and Rome. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter (2017): 75-123.

Events:
16 April 2018
Workshop “Procedural knowledge in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia” at the Cluster of Excellence "The Formation of Normative Orders"
Um Anmeldung wird gebeten: Diese E-Mail-Adresse ist vor Spambots geschützt! Zur Anzeige muss JavaScript eingeschaltet sein!

24. April 2018
Vortrag im Wissenschaftshistorischen Kolloquium von Prof. Annette Warner und Prof. Moritz Epple
Um Anmeldung wird gebeten: Diese E-Mail-Adresse ist vor Spambots geschützt! Zur Anzeige muss JavaScript eingeschaltet sein!

Prof. Dr. Lucian Ashworth

Full Professor and Head of Department, Department of Political Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland (MUN)

25 June until 23 July 2018

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Jens Steffek

Funded by Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften


Lucian M. Ashworth is a professor in political science at the Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s Canada. He is an International Relations (IR) scholar, and his main area of interest is the history of international thought. He has published widely on the topics of international thought and the disciplinary history of IR. His latest book is A History of International Thought (Routledge, 2014), and he is currently working on a new book for Routledge provisionally titled International Relations in the Stream of Time, which is will be published in 2019.

Research project title:
Missing voices in the history of international thought. A critical re-evaluation of global thinking since 1880

Abstract
International thought of the last century and a half is not exhausted by what is remembered by the academic field of International Relations (IR). Indeed, IR itself even tends to forget large parts of its own past theorising.
This project looks at how several of these lost narratives have been recovered in IR, with particular emphasis on lost approaches dealing with political economy, political geography, feminism, race and imperialism. This includes approaches outside of the English speaking world. I am particularly interested in how the recovery of past approaches affects our interpretations of both the origins and the nature of IR and international thought.

Publications (selection):
Lucian M. Ashworth, A History of International Thought. From the Origins of the Modern State to Academic International Relations (London: Routledge, 2014).
International Relations Theory and the Labour Party: Intellectuals and Policy Making 1918-1945 (London: IBTauris, 2007).
Creating International Studies. Angell, Mitrany and the Liberal Tradition (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999).
(Edited with David Long) New Perspectives on International Functionalism (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999).
Lucian M. Ashworth, Mapping a New World: Geography and the Interwar Study of International Relations. International Studies Quarterly, March 2013, 57(1), 138–149.
Lucian M. Ashworth, “The Poverty of Paradigms: Subcultures, Trading Zones and the Case of Liberal Socialism in Interwar International Relations”, International Relations, March 2012, vol. 26 no. 1, 35-59.
“Realism and the Spirit of 1919: Halford Mackinder, Geopolitics, and the Reality of the League of Nations”, European Journal of International Relations, June 2011, 17(2), 279-301.

Events:
6 July 2018
Workshop "The Hundred Years' Crisis: Global Order in Historical Perspective"
For further information: Click here...

Dr. Amy Hondo

Postdoctoral Researcher, Princeton University, USA

October 2017 until September 2018

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Funded by The Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften

Amy Hondo investigates questiones of Historical injustice, collective responsibility, political theory and indigenous rights, justice and the
politics of race, ethics and public policy, feminist theory, and the politics of time.

 

 

 

 

Research project title:
Structural Injustice, Social Trust, and the Presence of the Past

Research Abstract:
Past injustices have a powerful hold over the present. Consider indigenous rights claims in the Americas and Australia, calls for reparations for the transatlantic slave trade, ethnic minority and national claims for colonial traumas, and demands for the recognition of war crimes in Asia. These examples motivate the intuition that past injustice continues to generate strong moral and political obligations in the present. However, for pragmatic, principled, and philosophical reasons, there remains intense resistance to the idea that present persons ought to be held responsible for wrongs committed by prior generations.
In my dissertation, Untying Knots: History, Injustice, and Political Responsibility, I untangle the fraught discourse on historical injustice in order to understand what counts as the injustice, who counts as wronged and responsible, and why history matters. In the American context, a legacy of injustice continues to shape the moral and material landscape of the present. I offer a forceful critique of recent work in political philosophy and show that assumptions about time and causation limit theorists' ability to engage with the full injury and injustice experienced by American Indian and African American communities. I go on to develop a theory of responsibility for past injustice that identifies and responds to the normative consequences of long-standing patterns of interaction between communities. This research contributes to literature on historical injustice, group responsibility, inequality, reparations, and indigenous rights claims.

Publications:
Dissertation Title: Untying Knots: History, Injustice, and Political Responsibility

Events:

8 February 2018, 11 am
»An Unjust Condition is Distinct from the Injustice of Its Persistence. Continuity-Dependent Features of Historical Injustice«
Fellow Kolloquium im Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Uchenna Okeja

Associate professor, Rhodes University, South Africa

October 2017 until January 2018

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Dr. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann

Funded by The Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften.

Research project title:
The public sphere in African political thought


Research abstract:

Focusing on analysis of African arenas for deliberation, I aim in my research to demonstrate the possible understandings embedded in these practices that are instructive for democratic theory and practice. I consider this endeavour important for two reasons. The first reason is the need to point out the misunderstandings of these practices in the works of political theorists. The second reason is the need for a reconstructive analysis that could serve as the basis for articulation of a well-founded African political philosophy. It is certainly true that tones of papers and books have been written on the so-called African political condition. From these works, a lot of insights can be gleaned. The major challenge, however, is that Africa is still in search of a model of self-rule that is premised on a plausibly argued political philosophy. This is the goal I am aiming to contribute to in my research. (Uchenna Okeja)

Publications (selection):
»Introduction: Globalizing or Transcending Global Justice?«, In: Philosophical Papers, 46: 1, S.1-11, 2017.
»Reverse Migration, Brain Drain and Global Justice«, In: South African Journal of Philosophy, 36: 1, S.133-143, 2017.
»Evaluating Societies Morally: The Case of Development and ‘Developing’ Societies«, In: Analyse und Kritik, (forthcoming).
»The Moral Challenge of Expatriate Employment in Developing Countries«, In: Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, (forthcoming).
»Palaver and Consensus as metaphors for the Public Sphere in African philosophy«, In: Murad Idris, Leigh Jenco and Megan Thomas (hrsg.): Oxford Handbook of Comparative Political Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press, (forthcoming).

Prof. Dr. Maria Kaiafa-Gbandi

Director of the Research Institute for Transparence, Corruption and Financial Crime, Law Faculty Aristotle University Thessaloniki

Aufenthalt:
Oktober bis Dezember 2017

Forschungsprojekt:
Das Sicherheitsstrafrecht zur Bekämpfung des Terrorismus und die Grenzen der Kriminalisierung

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.


Maria Kaiafa-Gbandi is Professor of Criminal Law at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. She is also Director of the »Research Institute for Transparency, Corruption and Financial Crime« of the Aristoteles University of Thessaloniki, a member of the Expert Group of the European Commission on European Criminal Justice and a member of the Council of the European Law Institute (ELI) based in Vienna.


Forschungsvorhaben:
Im Mittelpunkt der Forschung steht die Anwendung des Strafrechts im Rahmen der modernen EU-Sicherheitsagenda gegen den Terrorismus: ihre Merkmale, die zu beobachtende Erosion wichtiger Grundzüge des Strafrechts durch die entsprechenden neuen EU-Kriminalisierungsvorgaben (Richtlinie 2017/541) – und vor allem die Frage nach den Kriminalisierungsgrenzen im modernen Rechtsstaat. Die Untersuchung der Entwicklung vom »Risiko-« zum »Sicherheitsstrafrecht« soll einen Beitrag zur Diskussion über die grundrechtsbezogenen Grenzen der Kriminalisierung im Rechtsstaat leisten. Ziel des Forschungsvorhabens ist die Formulierung eines konkreten Vorschlags zur Wiederherstellung der verlorenen Balance zwischen Freiheit und Sicherheit auf dem Gebiet der strafrechtlichen Repression des Terrorismus. (Maria Kaiafa-Gbandi).

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Elements of EU Criminal Law and its transposition into the Greek legal order, Athen-Thessaloniki 2016.
Τhe EU and US criminal law as two tier models-Αcomparison of their central axes with a view to addressing challenges for EU criminal law and for the protection of fundamental rights, Stockholm 2016.
»Punishing Corruption in the Public and the Private Sector: Key Issues on the Current EU Policy and the Rule-of-Law Challenges«, in: Research Handbook on EU Criminal Law, eds. V. Mitsilegas, M. Bergström und Th. Konstadinides, 2016, pp. 376-399.
»A cohesive Model to Counteract Financial Crime and Corruption in the Public Sector«, in: Financial crime and corruption in the public sector, Bd. 3, eds. Dikaio & Oikonomia - P.N Sakkoulas, Athen 2015.

Veranstaltungen:

24. Oktober 2017, 18 Uhr
Vortrag innerhalb des Rechtstheoretischen Arbeitskreises am Exzellenzcluster „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“ (Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther)
Menschenwürde: Vom Strafrecht geschützt oder auch gefährdet?
Campus Westend, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

2. November 2017, 11 Uhr
Vortrag
The criminal respression of racist rhetoric, racist crimes, and race discrimination – the Greek example
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Iain Macdonald

Professor of philosophy, Université de Montréal, Canada

May until August 2017

Research project title:
Future Possibility: Figures of Possibility in Hegel, Adorno, and Heidegger

In collaboration with Prof. Dr. Christoph Menke

Funded by The Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften

 

Professor Macdonald investigates questions of Nineteenth and twentieth century European philosophy: critical theory, phenomenology, aesthetics, Hegel, Marx.
 

 

 

 

 

Research abstract: My current research falls under several headings, organized mainly around modality, especially the concept of possibility and the problem of “actualization of philosophy” announced by Marx (but which has its roots in Hegel’s thought). In a monograph in progress, these questions are developed in reference to the works of Hegel, Adorno, and Heidegger. The book first explores the rather curious neglect of the concept of the future in Hegel’s writings, where the future is taken to be a figure of possibility. In this context, various aspects are discussed, including the critique of the ought (Sollen) and the posterity of thought (Nachwelt). Adorno’s critique of Hegel also comes into play, especially as regards Hegel’s concepts of actuality, reality, and actualization (Wirklichkeit, Realität, Verwirklichung), as presented in the Science of Logic but also in connection with the concept of education/enculturation (Bildung) discussed in the Phänomenologie des Geistes  and the Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts. Adorno’s own view of possibility is then presented in detail, with special emphasis placed on the suppression of emancipatory possibilities that are currently blocked by a variety of social mechanisms. The central claim of the book is that the Hegelian typology of possibility needs to be reworked in light of Adorno’s diagnosis of such “blocked” possibilities. In light of this question, Heidegger’s concept of possibility (presented in Sein und Zeit, as well as in the Beiträge zur Philosophie and elsewhere) is analyzed as a counter-view to Adorno’s. I am currently writing the ultimate chapter of the book, which deals with the Adorno-Heidegger dispute, as seen through the lens of the concept of possibility. This approach has the advantage of providing a clear point of conceptual tension that also provides a novel perspective on the incompatibility of Adorno’s and Heidegger’s philosophical approaches. Reference will also be made to political aspects of the debate, including in relation to writings by Ernst Jünger and Walter Benjamin. In Frankfurt, I will work mainly on this ultimate phase of the book. Additionally, in connection with the argument put forward in the monograph but conceived as a separate, article-length project, I am also working on modality and the notion of “deactualization” (Entwirklichung) in Marx’s writings. Finally, I am in the planning stages of developing some of the insights of the book in the context of the philosophy of education, focussing mainly on Hegel and Adorno. (Iain Macdonald)
 

Publications (selection):
“Unfettering the Future: Estrangement and Ambiguity in The Trial,” in E. Hammer (ed.), Kafka’s The Trial: Philosophical Perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming.
“Vers une “démodalisation” du possible: Heidegger et le clivage de l’estre,” in Philosophie, forthcoming.
“Adorno’s Modal Utopianism: Possibility and Actuality in Adorno and Hegel,” Adorno Studies, vol. 1, no. 1 (2017): 1-12.
“L’autre pensée: la possibilité de l’autre commencement et la critique de l’effectivité dans les Beiträge zur philosophie,” in C. Perrin (ed.), Qu’appelle-t-on la pensée ? Le philosopher heideggérien, Bucharest: Zeta Books, 2014.

Events:
Paper Presentation, 16 June 2017, 11.30am
Actualization, Deactualization: Marx, Hegel, and Modality

Lecture, 19 July 2017, 6pm
Actualization, Deactualization: Marx, Hegel, and Modality

Professor Casiano Hacker-Cordón

Adjunct Professor in Political Science at CUNY - Brookly & Hunter College, New York NY USA

November 2016 until July 2017

Research project title:
Democracy, Referendum and European Union

In collaboration with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Funded by The Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with the Leibniz Research Group “Transnational Justice”

Professor Hacker-Cordón investigates questions of political philosophy. Trained in law and political science, he has taught at universities in the United States, Latin America and Europe. He believes that philosophical thought, conversation, and long walks are the primary components of a life welllived but his political philosophy counsels policies strongly prioritizing everyone's most vital interests in water, food and shelter, and protection from physical violence over other political goals.
 

Research abstract: This project investigates the relationship between the idea of the democracy and the popular referendum method of decisionmaking. While the general question of how to conceptualize democracy looms large and is implicated throughout, the focus is on the practical question of how to remedy what is widely referred to as the European Union's 'democratic deficit'. Starting from the observation that referenda have historically been used in the European Union at various national levels to resolve very important indeed fundamentalpolitical questions, the project proposes a role for Europe-wide referenda in which all European citizens participate qua European citizens. The proposed institutional figure is subject to a number of objections, philosophical, legal and politicalpractical all of these should be answerable with some thoroughness and significant clarity, given the intrinsic capacity of democracy's values to compel and the nature of the argument explored.
 

Publications (selection):
Democracy's Edges (co-editor and introduced with I. Shapiro). Cambridge University Press, 1999
Democracy's Value (co-editor and introduced with I. Shapiro). Cambridge University Press, 1999
"An Antitrust Theory of Group Recognition" (co-author with T.J. Miley). Centro de Investigaciones y Docencia de Trabajo, SDTEP #198 (December 2007)

 

Events:
Further informaton will follow

 

Prof. Dr. Till van Rahden (2017)

Inhaber des Canada Research Chair in German and European Studies an der Université de Montréal

Aufenthalt:
Januar bis August 2017

Forschungsprojekt:
Forms, Style and Manners: Democracy as a Way of Life

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.

 

Till van Rahden ist Inhaber des Canada Research Chair in German and European Studies an der Université de Montréal, Kanada. Bereits seit 2010 forscht er als Research Fellow in Kooperation mit dem Exzellenzcluster “Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen” am Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind unter anderem neuere europäische und deutsche Geschichte und die Geschichte der Demokratie. In Deutschland hielt er Professuren für Geschichte in Köln und Bielefeld, wo er seinen Doktorabschluss machte.

Forschungsvorhaben: "We are all democrats now. Yet concerns over the future viability of democracy pervade scholarly and public controversies. Today, the social sciences dominate the domain of democratic theory. In contrast, the humanities have contributed comparatively little to our understanding of democracy’s fragile and contingent nature in the past and in the present. Against this background, I aim to strengthen the role of the humanities in scholarly exchanges over the meaning, the fragility and the contingency of democracy as a way of life. The focus of the research project is not on the content of content, i.e. democratic ideas in democratic polities, but on the content of form. It therefore invites conversations about the democratic content of aesthetic forms, styles, and manners. Such an endeavor responds to the suspicion that an emphasis on democratic forms, styles, and aesthetics detracts from more urgent questions about democratic substance and procedures. Key questions of such an endeavor include: If we argue that a specific culture is an essential, if elusive bedrock for democratic polities, is it possible to identify which forms and styles stimulate, sustain and revive democracy as a way of life?” (Till van Rahden)

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
»Sanfte Vaterschaft und Demokratie in der frühen Bundesrepublik«, in: Bernhard Gotto and Elke Seefried (Hg.), Männer mit ›Makel‹. Männlichkeiten und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Zeitgeschichte im Gespräch, Bd. 25, München: de Gruyter, 2016, S. 142-156.

(Hg. mit Oliver Kohns and Martin Roussel), Autorität: Krise, Konstruktion und Konjunktur (=Texte zur politischen Ästhetik Bd. 5), Paderborn: Wilhelm Fink, 2016.

»History in the House of the Hangman: How Postwar Germany Became a Key Site for the Study of Jewish History«, in: Steven E. Aschheim and Vivian Liska (Hg.), The German-Jewish Experience Revisited, Berlin: de Gruyter, 2015, S. 171-192.

Veranstaltungen:

8. Mai 2017, 18.15 Uhr
Lumpensammeln: Siegfried Kracauer und die Geschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

13. März 2017, 19.00 Uhr
Vortrag
Wie Vati die Demokratie lernte: Zur Frage der Autorität in der frühen Bundesrepublik
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

8. Mai 2017, 18 Uhr c.t.
Vortrag
Lumpensammeln: Siegfried Kracauer und die Geschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

7. Juli 2017
Workshop mit Johannes Voelz (Heisenberg-Professor of American Studies, Democracy, and Aesthetics)
Was war demokratische Kultur? Moralische Leidenschaften, Ästhetik und Politik

Zum Forschungsaufenthalt von Prof. van Rahden 2015: Hier...

Dr. Christophe Schmit

Institute: History of Science, CNRS, Observatoire de Paris, SYRTE (Système de Référence Temps-Espace), Paris

October 2016

Research project title:
The Normativity of Formal Knowledge: The Exact Sciences, Equality and Situated Universalism in the 18th Century

In collaboration with Prof. Dr. Moritz Epple

The Fellowship is funded by the Cluster of Excellence "The Formation of Normative Orders"


I was born in 1976. I obtained a Master in physics and I defended a PhD in history of science in 2007 (history of mechanics around 17th and 18th centuries). I am a researcher to the CNRS  (National Center for Scientific Research) in Paris.

 

 

Research abstract:
My field of research deals with history of physics and mechanics in seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, especially philosophical mechanics (Malebranche etc.) and the works of Jean Le Rond D’Alembert (Traité de dynamique, Encyclopédie etc.) I’m member of the French team which publishes D’Alembert’s Complete Works (CNRS éditions ;  http://dalembert.academie-sciences.fr/)

Publications (selection):
Sur l’origine du principe général de Jean Le Rond D’Alembert », Annals of Science, Vol. 70, Issue 4, p. 493-530, 2013

Rapports entre équilibre et dynamique au tournant des 17e et 18e siècles », Early Science and Medicine, vol. 19, Issue 6, 2014, p. 505-548.

Méchanique, Statique, Dynamique. Répartition du savoir et définitions dans l’Encyclopédie », Recherches sur Diderot et sur l’Encyclopédie, 1ère partie, n° 49, p. 224-258, 2014 ; 2eme partie, n° 50, p. 273-299, 2015.

Introduction générale. § V. Mécanique générale », dans D'Alembert, Œuvres complètes, série V, volume 2, Correspondance générale 1741-1572, I. Passeron (dir.), Paris, CNRS Editions, 2015, p. xciii-cv

Events:
Further informaton will follow

Prof. Dr. Friedrich Kratochwil (2016)

Professor em. für Internationale Beziehungen

Aufenthalt:
Oktober bis November 2016

Forschungsprojekt:
Praxis: on Acting and Knowing

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Gunther Hellmann
 
Friedrich Kratochwil studied philosophy, politics , and classics at Munich and went as a Fulbright grantee to the US where  received a MA from Georgetown University in international relations  and Ph.D. in political science from Princeton University.
He taught at the universities of Maryland, Columbia, Denver and Penn, before returning to Europe in 1995 and becoming chair of international relations at the LMU in Munich and later at the European University Institute in Florence (2003- 2011). He is was visiting professor at Kyung Hee University in Seoul ,  the Central European University in Budapest, and more recently  PUC- Minas Gerais  (Papal University) at Belo Horizonte, Brazil (2014).
He  published widely on international relations, social theory, international organization and international law  and is the author of Rules Norms and Decisions (Cambridge, 1989) and (with Yosef Lapid) coeditor of The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory (1996 ) His latest books, entitled The Puzzles of Politics, and The Status of Law in World Society, were published by Routledge in 2011,  and by Cambridge University Press in 2014.
He was the editor of the European Journal of International Relations (2000-2004) and has served on editorial boards of political science, law and sociology journals in the US, Europe, and Asia.

Forschungsvorhaben:
"This book pursues two objectives: one, to provide an inventory of the ongoing practices in in contemporary politics and two, to offer a more critical engagement with social action instead of approaching it via an “ideal theory”. In other words, it seemed imperative to examine praxis more explicitly as it was first outlined by Aristotle, only to resurface later in Hume’s philosophy of common life and in his historical work, or in the “pragmatist” critique of the last century.”
These two topics are taken up in the chapters 1-6, and in the “second” part of this book (chaps. 8-10) respectively. The latter attempts to develop a more systematic approach to action through a close reading of Hume and some of the pragmatist literature. These two parts of the book, -the first focusing mostly but not exclusively on the existing repertoires of for action in contemporary international relations (and sometimes involving also their genealogy) – and the second, consisting mainly in a critical reflections of what would be entailed for an analysis if we took “action seriously”, are held together by chapter 7. It deals with the problem of historical reflection, which is occasioned by the vagaries of having to act in irreversible time and under conditions of contingency and necessarily incomplete knowledge that define praxis.
Although the implications of this move to link the two areas via “history” and its different modes of “remembering” (and forgetting) rather than via the construction of an “ideal theory” – be that a model of action familiar from rational choice theory or from the Rawlsian “choice behind the veil of ignorance” or the early Habermasian “ideal speech situation” – will become obvious only in the last few chapters It is therefore, not accidental that I take in chapt. 7 Hedley Bull as my guide, even though I am quite critical of some of his arguments about a “classical approach.” I try to re-formulate his position and link it more systematically to both to the Aristotelian tradition of prudence, and to the pragmatist interest in “ordinary language” and conceptual analysis. Only in this way an adequate understanding of praxis seems to be possible, as it provides the reasons for both being critical of the efforts of ideal theory a la Rawls or the early Habermas, and for not falling back on uncritically examined “lessons of history” (as some forms of realism), for limiting the praxis to the unreflective habits, or for discovering in practices the “gluon” for a future social science.
These ideas are followed up in chapter 8 and 9 and 10 which develop the argument further by a close second reading of Hume and his philosophy of “common life” which was intended as an anti-Cartesian manifesto in which the nature of conventions and historical experience provided elements instead of incontrovertible foundations or where in following a certain method true knowledge could be gained. Hume is not only critical of absolute foundations, but also sees the task of “true philosophy” not in claiming a position outside the practical/historical realm but in criticism based on practical experience rather than epistemological or methodological arguments. The result is a plea for a “non-ideal theory” which no longer subjects praxis to inappropriate theoretical standards." (Friedrich Kratochwil)

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
The Status of Law in World Society: Meditations On The Role And Rule Of Law, Cambridge University Press, New York 2014.
The Puzzles of Politics: Inquiries Into the Genesis and Transformation of International Relation Religions, Taylor & Francis, New York 2010.
Rules, Norms, and Decisions: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, Cambridge University Press, New York 1991.

Veranstaltungen:
24. und 25. Oktober 2016
Frankfurt Lecture des Exzellenzclusters "Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen"
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Julia Roos

Professorin für Geschichte, Indiana Universität

Aufenthalt:
August bis Dezember 2016

Forschungsprojekt:
German Racial Regimes in a Transnational Context: An Afro-German Microhistory

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir

Fellowship des Exzellenzclusters "Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen", in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Historischen Kolleg am Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschafte und der Alfons und Gertrud Kassel-Stiftung


Julia Roos hat 2001 an der Carnegie Mellon Universität in Geschichte promoviert. 2002 erhielt sie den Fritz Stern Preis für die beste eingereichte Dissertation im Feld deutsche Geschichte an einer nordamerikanischen Universität. Von 2002-2003 war sie Visiting Research Fellow am Institut für Geschichte an der Princeton Universität. Seit 2006 hat Roos eine Stelle als Professorin für Geschichte an der Indiana Universität in Bloomington inne. Im Jahr 2012 wurde sie dort vom Assistant Professor Without Tenure zum Associate Professor With Tenure befördert.

 
Forschungsvorhaben (engl.):

The project focuses on a biographical microhistory to examine broader aspects of different German “racial regimes”—or, historically specific constellations of predominant beliefs about, and legal and political practices towards, Blacks as perceived racial “Others”—during crucial moments of the twentieth century. “Erika Diekmann” was born in Worms in the occupied Rhineland in 1920. Her mother was German. Her father was a Senegalese French soldier. Until she was eleven, Erika stayed in a Protestant children’s home in Worms. In 1931, her guardians sent her to a Lutheran school for Christian Arab girls in Jerusalem. In 1949, Erika returned to West Germany, along with her (white) German husband and their son. In 1957, she and her family immigrated to the United States. Erika died in Kentucky in 1963.
Erika’s story offers unique opportunities for situating German attitudes towards Blacks within broader international and transnational contexts. As a child of the first Rhineland occupation, Erika was the target of 1920s propaganda against the “black horror on the Rhine” (schwarze Schmach), which aimed to discredit the Versailles Treaty by falsely accusing colonial French soldiers of mass rapes of Rhenish women. “Black horror” propaganda borrowed selectively from Allied war propaganda about the “rape of Belgium” by atavistic “Huns.” The Nazis revived black horror propaganda in their murderous campaign against African French soldiers during WW II. Memories of the Weimar-era and Nazi campaigns against colonial French soldiers continued to reverberate in postwar West Germany and helped shape Germans’ encounters with African-American GIs. Erika’s biography also points to certain hitherto neglected complexities and realignments in twentieth-century German racial discourse.  For instance, while Erika’s conservative Protestant mentors impressed on her the centrality of marriage and motherhood, the Nazis subjected hundreds of other Afro-German children of the Rhineland occupation to compulsory sterilization, irrevocably depriving them of the right to become parents.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Weimar through the Lens of Gender: Prostitution Reform, Woman’s Emancipation, and German Democracy, 1919-1933. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2010.
“An Afro-German Microhistory: Gender, Religion, and the Challenges of Diasporic Dwelling,” Central European History vol. 49, no. 2 (June 2016): 240-60.
“Racist Hysteria to Pragmatic Rapprochement? The German Debate about Rhenish ‘Occupation Children,’ 1920-1930.” Contemporary European History 22, no.2 (May 2013): 155-180.
“Nationalism, Racism, and Propaganda in Early Weimar Germany: Contradictions in the Campaign against the ‘Black Horror on the Rhine.’” German History 30, no. 1 (March 2012): 45-74.

Veranstaltungen:
29. Oktober 2016, 14 Uhr
Kamingespräch des Frauennetzwerkes des Exzellenzcluster "Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen"
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

11. November 2016, 11.30 Uhr
Paper Presentation
Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften
Am Wingertsberg 4
61348 Bad Homburg v.d. Höhe

Prof. Dr. José Brunner

Professor am Cohn Institut für Wissenschaftsphilosophie und -geschichte sowie an der Buchmann Fakultät für Rechtswissenschaft der Universität Tel Aviv.

Aufenthalt:
Juni bis Juli 2016

Forschungsprojekt:
Gegenwärtig schließt Brunner die Arbeit an einer Monographie ab, die unter dem Titel Geschichte als Kriminalroman beim Wallstein Verlag erscheinen wird, und die sich mit Debatten zur Ethik und Methodik der Holocausthistoriographie auseinandersetzt wie auch den Notwendigkeiten, Möglichkeiten und Problemen eines Dialogs zwischen Historikern und Psychologen, im Versuch, den Holocaust zu verstehen.

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther und Prof. Dr. Axel Honneth

José Brunner ist Professor am Institut für Wissenschaftsphilosophie und -geschichte sowie an der rechtswissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Universität Tel Aviv. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind unter anderem das Verhältnis von Recht, Gedächtnis und Identität, die Politik und Geschichte der Psychoanalyse, die Politik des Traumadiskurses und Praktiken der Wiedergutmachung am Beispiel von Holocaustüberlebenden. Er hatte Aufenthalte als Gastforscher und Gastprofessor an zahlreichen Universitäten, darunter in Harvard und Montreal. Von 2005 bis 2013 war er Direktor des Minerva Instituts für deutsche Geschichte. Gegenwärtig  leitet er das interdisziplinäre Forschungsprogramm für Rechts- und Humanwissenschaften sowie das Eva & Marc Besen Institute for the Study of Historical Consciousness. José Brunner ist Mitbegründer der ersten »legal clinic« für die Rechte von Holocaustüberlebenden in Israel.

Forschungsvorhaben:
Walter Benjamin postuliert eine Historiographie, die die Geschichte gegen den Strich bürstet indem sie nicht nur ein wahres Bild von der Vergangenheit schafft, sondern auch eines, das die Gegenwart in einem kritischen Licht beleuchtet. Wie lässt sich dieses doppelte, epistemische und ethische, Postulat zur Geschichtsschreibung in Bezug auf den Holocaust verwirklichen, der oft als ein Absolutes verstanden wird, an dem herkömmliche ethische und epistemische Perspektiven geprüft und häufig auch für unzulänglich befunden werden? In keinem anderen Bereich der Geschichtsschreibung werden ethische Argumente so stark gegen epistemische Positionen ins Feld geführt, dient moralische Empörung so oft zur Ablehnung von narrativen Ansätzen. Gibt es also moralische Normen in der Holocaustgeschichtsschreibung, die Historiker zu gewissen Forschungs- Erzählungs- und Erklärungsformen verpflichten und ihnen andere verwehren?
Brunner untersucht diese Frage in Bezug auf den schwierigen Dialog zwischen Historikern und Psychologen, in dem es darum geht, wie man erklären und darzustellen kann, warum gewisse Menschen zu Massenmördern wurden und andere zu deren Opfer, was das Tatmotiv war, was Zeugen wussten, warum sie Opfern halfen oder zu Komplizen der Täter wurden, und ob und was aus der Geschichte dieses Verbrechens gelernt werden kann.
Im Versuch, die Möglichkeiten eines die Holocaust-Historiographie bereichernden Dialogs zwischen Geschichte und Psychologie auszuloten, prüft Brunner die ethischen und epistemischen Verpflichtungen, Probleme und Schranken, die ihn bisher gekennzeichnet haben. Zudem formuliert er einen eigenen Standpunkt, der ihm zur Evaluierung von verschiedenen Erklär- und Erzählformen zum Holocaust dient wie auch zu einem Vorschlag für einen ergiebigen Austausch zwischen Historikern und Psychologen.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Recht auf Wahrheit. Genese eines neuen Menschenrechts (hrsg. mit Daniel Stahl), Wallstein, Göttingen 2016.
Die Politik des Traumas. Gewalterfahrungen und psychisches Leid in den USA, in Deutschland und im Israel/Palästina-Konflikt, Suhrkamp, Berlin 2014.
Die Globalisierung der Wiedergutmachung. Politik, Moral, Moralpolitik (hrsg. mit Constantin Goschler und Norbert Frei), Wallstein, Göttingen 2013.
Die Praxis der Wiedergutmachung: Geschichte, Erfahrung und Wirkung in Deutschland und Israel (hrsg. mit Norbert Frei und Constantin Goschler), Wallstein, Göttingen 2009.
Psyche und Macht: Freud politisch lesen, Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2001.

Veranstaltungen:
Paper Presentation
Geschichte als Kriminalroman: Gibt es Normen der Holocaustgeschichtsschreibung und was haben Psychologen mit ihnen zu tun?

Informationen zum Forschungsaufenthalt von Prof. Dr. José Brunner 2015: Hier...

Dr. Brian Milstein

Length of stay:
January to September 2016

Research Project Title:
Crisis Consciousness, Political Community, and Transnational Justice

In cooperation with Principal Investigator Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Funded by The Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, Goethe University Frankfurt in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften

Brian Milstein conducts research in contemporary critical social theory, democratic theory, world politics, the European nation-state, and, most recently, theories of crisis and crisis-consciousness. He completed his Ph.D. in 2011 at the New School for Social Research, where he received the Hannah Arendt Award in Politics for his dissertation work. He previously held fellowships at the Freie Universität Berlin and the Collège d’études mondiales (FMSH) in Paris and has published articles in the European Journal of Philosophy and the European Journal of Political Theory. His first book, Commercium: Critical Theory from a Cosmopolitan Point of View, was published by Rowman & Littlefield International in Fall 2015.

Abstract:
I will be investigating how our consciousness of crisis in a globalizing world plays out in relation to the changing nature of political community, and I will be exploring the connections between crisis consciousness, justice, and injustice within and across boundaries. Since at least the time of Hobbes, ideas about political and social crisis have greatly informed the development of the modern worldview. But pervasive as the concept of crisis is in discussions about politics, it remains woefully undertheorized in normative political theory. Most of our key concepts—justice, democracy, citizenship, freedom, equality—assume the background of an already stable society, with predictable rules of economic, social, and institutional performance; the society of ideal theory is typically a “crisis-free” society. Such a way of thinking lends credence to the long-standing assumption that, in times of crisis, normative ideals like justice and democracy must give way to “more essential” issues like necessity or stability. This is a false assumption, and as world society finds itself engulfed in ever-more frequent crises of various kinds, it is a potentially dangerous one. We need to rethink the role of the concept of crisis in modern political thought, beginning with such fundamental questions as: How do our conceptions of crisis inform our conceptions of society? How does the increasingly transnational scope of crises alter the way we think about the scope of political community? What political dynamics are at work in facing crisis, and do they admit of content relevant to questions of justice? Is there a difference between an “effective” response to a crisis and a “just” response? How does the grammar of crisis translate into the possibility of political action and social change?

Publications (selection):
Commercium: Critical Theory from a Cosmopolitan Point of View (Rowman & Littlefield International, 2015) (https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781783482832/Commercium-Critical-Theory-From-a-Cosmopolitan-Point-of-View)
“Thinking Politically about Crisis: A Pragmatist Perspective,“ European Journal of Political Theory 14(2): 141-60 (http://ept.sagepub.com/content/14/2/141)
“Kantian Cosmopolitanism beyond ‘Perpetual Peace’: Commercium, Critique, and the Cosmopolitan Problematic,” European Journal of Philosophy 21(1): 118-43 (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0378.2010.00437.x/abstract )

 

8. Juli 2016, 11.30 Uhr
Paper Presentation
"Emergency powers and democratic equality"

 

Dr. Luke Ulas

Duration of Stay:
1 October 2015 until 30 September 2016

Research Project:
Cosmopolitanism and global solidarity

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

The Fellowship is supported by the Cluster of Excellence "The Formation of Normative Orders"

Luke Ulas achieved his Ph.D. in Political Theory at the London School of Economics and Political Science in 2014. His thesis was titled "Realising Cosmopolitanism: The Role of a World State". In 2014/15 he was a Justitia Amplificata Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Goethe University Frankfurt.

 

 

Abstract:
Cosmopolitanism faces a problem that has to date not been adequately confronted, namely the cosmopolitan solidarity problem. This problem, put simply, recognises the reality that, currently, the global population has little appetite for redistributing resources or for otherwise changing behaviours and practices so as to realise cosmopolitan principles. There are two different versions of this problem. In one, it is assumed that cosmopolitan principles are widely accepted and yet are not being acted upon; the problem is thus largely one of moral motivation (Dobson, 2006; Lenard, 2010). In another version, the problem is not simply one of motivation, but also that cosmopolitan principles are in fact not widely accepted in the first place (Miller, 2000).  This problem, in both its forms, is a critical one for cosmopolitan theory, because those who defend cosmopolitan principles consider themselves to be engaged in a normative pursuit, which entails those principles being feasibly realisable. The cosmopolitan solidarity problem imperils the normativity of cosmopolitanism, because it raises the concern that humanity being guided by cosmopolitan principles may in some sense be infeasible.

My year as a Normative Orders Postdoctoral Fellow will be spent investigating theoretical questions that arise in relation to the cosmopolitan solidarity problem, to include:  
-     In which ways can global solidarity be conceptualised? In other words, which theoretical possibilities for turning the global population toward acceptance of cosmopolitan principles and/or motivating action in accordance with those principles have been – and can be – offered?
-     What are the institutional preconditions that these various conceptualisations bring with them?
-    Which, if any, appear to have morally troubling consequences?
-    Which, if any, appear in the end to be a promising theoretical response to the cosmopolitan solidarity problem

Publications (selection):

Doing Things By Halves: On Intermediary Global Institutionl Proposals?, Ethics and Global Politics (forthcoming 2016).

Cosmopolitanism, Self-Interest and World Government?, Political Studies (forthcoming 2016).

Transforming (but not Transcending) the State System? On Statist Cosmopolitanism? Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy (Online early DOI: 10.1080/13698230.2015.1048071).

Global Community as a Response to the Cosmopolitan Solidarity Problem?, in Henrik Enroth and Douglas Brommesson (eds.) Global Community? Transnational and Transdisciplinary Exchanges (Rowman and Littlefield, 2015).

Miller's Models and their Applicability to Nations?, Theoria 129: 79?94 (2011)

Events:
11 July 2016, 6-8pm
Lecture within the IGP-Kolloquium

Prof. Dr. Dmitri Nikulin

Professor of Philosophy at the New School for Social Research in New York

Duration of stay:
August 2015 until January 2016

Research Project:
Critique of Bored Reason

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Fellowship in cooperation with Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main


Dmitri Nikulin is Professor of Philosophy at the New School for Social Research in New York. His interests range from ancient philosophy and early modern science to philosophy of history and philosophy of memory.

 

 

 

 

Research Project:
This project is meant to provide a critique of some forms of modern radical philosophy by drawing its genealogy from Diogenes the Cynic to Nietzsche and contemporary thinkers like Rorty, Rancière and Agamben. It revolves around the topic of boredom as the mode of being of the contemporary monological and lonely subject who exists in isolation and thinks itself in constant repetition. Scandal, then, is an attempt to overcome the state of the exclusion of the other, which is expressed epistemologically in the idea of the modern scientific revolution, aesthetically in modernism, and politically and socially in the idea of political revolution. I intend to argue for an understanding of reason as communicative and comically scandalous, capable of providing real answers to real problems, rather than being a negative instrument of the destruction of tradition and establishing one’s autonomous self.

Selection of most important publications (books):
Matter, Imagination and Geometry (Ashgate, 2002), On Dialogue (Lexington, 2006), Dialectic and Dialogue (Stanford, 2010), Comedy, Seriously (Palgrave, 2014), Memory: A History (Oxford, 2015).

Events:
Vortrag, 7. Dezember 2015
Collective Memory and Collective Recollection
Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe- Unviversität

Further information will follow

Prof. Dr. Friedrich Kratochwil

Professor em. für Internationale Beziehungen

Aufenthalt:
Juni bis Juli 2015

Forschungsprojekt:
Praxis: on Acting and Knowing

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Jens Steffek

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.
 
Friedrich Kratochwil gehört zu den bekanntesten Theoretikern der internationalen Beziehungen (IB) und gilt dort als einer der Begründer des sozialkonstruktivistischen Forschungsansatzes. Seine zahlreichen Publikationen bewegen sich im Grenzbereich zwischen IB, politischer Theorie und Rechtswissenschaften. Er war nach einer Promotion in Princeton unter anderem an der Universität Maryland, der Columbia University, der Pennsylvania State University, der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München und am Europäischen Hochschulinstitut in Florenz tätig. Nach seiner Emeritierung war Kratochwil Gastprofessor an der Central European University, sowie an Universitäten in Südkorea und Brasilien.
Forschungsvorhaben:
“In this project I attempt to answer some of the questions which were raised in two previous books: Rules, Norms and Decisions (CUP 1989) and The Status of  Law in World Society (CUP 2014), and in the subsequent discussions they have engendered. Both works used ‘law’ as a prism for understanding social and political action since the prevalent approaches in the field, as varied as they might be in regard to the research agenda or the methods, all seemed to share the epistemological conviction that a ‘theory of action’ has to satisfy the criteria of ‘theory’. It was however my suspicion that such a view - particularly well-articulated in positivist approaches to social analysis - was not only distorting but that it left important features of praxis unexplored. The new project, entitled Praxis: On Acting and Knowing, takes off from the earlier two books by arguing that a serious engagement with ‘praxis’ has to deconstruct the underlying metaphysical assumptions that privilege ‘theory’ and do justice to the peculiarities of action. Action is taking place in real (irreversible) time and is characterized by contingency instead of necessity and universality, as the ‘theoretical’ take presupposes. To that extent my analysis harks back to Aristotle but is actually more occasioned by the wonder why the idea of the ‘primacy’ of theory for generating useful knowledge and understanding the social world persisted even after the old ontology of the
‘chain of being’ was dislodged from its privileged position by the skeptics’ attack on the Cartesian quest for certainty. Thus, although the old ontological speculation was replaced by an epistemology that privileged the subject (rather than the object or the ideas), reason was again conceptualized as universal and a-historical (non-contingent), leaving the old privilege of a ‘timeless’ theory in place. In this project, I use Hume as my pivot to look back on the classical attempts of prudential reasoning and try to understand from his vantage point the conventional and historical character of social orders.” (Friedrich Kratochwil)

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
The Status of Law in World Society: Meditations On The Role And Rule Of Law, Cambridge University Press, New York 2014.

The Puzzles of Politics: Inquiries Into the Genesis and Transformation of International Relation Religions, Taylor & Francis, New York 2010.
Rules, Norms, and Decisions: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, Cambridge University Press, New York 1991.


Veranstaltungen:
12. Juni 2015
Doktorandenworkshop am Exzellenzcluster „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen"

3. Juli 2015

Vortrag an der Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt am Main

After theory, before empiricism – or, how to think about praxis

Prof. Dr. Emmanuel Melissaris

Associate Professor in Law, London School of Economics and Political Science

Aufenthalt:
Mai bis Juni 2015

Forschungsprojekt:
Eine post-metaphysische Theorie des Strafrechts

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.

Emmanuel Melissaris ist Associate Professor in Law am Law Department der London School of Economics and political Science (LSE). Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind die Philosophie und Soziologie des Rechts sowie Strafrechtstheorien. Aktuell beschäftigt er sich vor allem mit dem Problem des Rechtspluralismus und der Rechtfertigung von Verstößen gegen das Recht auf Eigentum. Der gebürtige Grieche studierte Jura in Athen und promovierte an der School of Law der University of Edinburgh. Er unterrichtete an der University of Manchester und der Keele University bevor er 2005 die Lehre an der LSE aufnahm. Emmanuel Mellissaris ist Mitglied der Redaktionsleitung des Jahresmagazins „Jurisprudence“.
Forschungsvorhaben:
„The aim of my research is to construct a political philosophical theory of the criminal law and explore its implications for criminalisation, criminal responsibility and punishment. The project is rooted in the post-petaphysical turn in political and legal philosophy. The aim is to construct a theory of the criminal law, which does not rely on controversial moral doctrines and is suitable for a specific type of political society with a specific type of institutional structure. This has several upshots. First, the wrongfulness of some acts is to be judged with reference to the political duties, flowing from the terms of social cooperation and not in relation to an independent moral order. Secondly, the criminal law is grounded in its acceptability by all citizens. Thirdly, the political conception of the person also determines the subject of the criminal law. In Frankfurt I hope to explore the specific implications of these general theses and develop general principles of criminalisation and criminal responsibility. In particular, I will consider the following questions: Under which political duties are participants in a political community with these general characteristics? Who may respond to violations of these political duties? What kind of response is justified and on what terms? What are the constraints to criminalisation and punishment (in particular constraints stemming from the rule of law, democracy and social justice)? How can acts be attributed to an actor simpliciter and as criminal offences?” (Emmanuel Melissaris)

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Thories of Crime and Punishment, in: Markus D. Dubber and Tatjana Hörnle (Hrsg.) The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law. Oxford Handbooks in Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2014.
Property offences as crimes of injustice, in: Criminal Law and Philosophy, 6 (2) 2012, S. 149-166.
McCoubrey & White's Textbook on Jurisprudence (mit J. E. Penner), Oxford University Press, Oxford 2012.
Ubiquitous Law : Legal Theory and the Space for Legal Pluralism, Ashgate, Farnham 2009.

Veranstaltungen:
Paper Presentation, 3. Juni 2015
Solidarity and State Punishment
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Amos Nascimento

Associate Professor des Interdisciplinary Arts & Sciences-Programms an der University of Washington, Tacoma/Seattle

Aufenthalt:
Juni bis Juli 2015

Forschungsprojekt:
Von regionalen Gemeinschaften zu globalen Menschenrechtsdiskursen: Kosmopolitanismus in Europa und Lateinamerika

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.

Amos Nascimento ist Associate Professor des Interdisciplinary Arts & Sciences-Programms (IAS) an der University of Washington in Tacoma. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind Kritische Theorie und Diskurstheorie sowie lateinamerikanische Philosophie, darunter vor allem Befreiungsethiken und Brazilian Studies. Er ist der Principal Investigator der „Normative Innovation“-Forschungsgruppe an der University of Washington, die sich aus interdisziplinärer Perspektive mit Menschenrechten, Kosmopolitismus und Normativität befasst. Amos Nascimento hat Musik, Sozialwissenschaften und Philosophy in Argentinien, Brasilien, den USA und Deutschland studiert. Seinen Doktor machte er an der Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt.

Forschungsvorhaben:
„Thema dieses Forschungsprojekts ist die Notwendigkeit einer pluralisierten und ausdifferenzierten Anwendung des kosmopolitischen Ideals am Beispiel existierender supranationalen Strukturen in Europa und Lateinamerika. Diese Pluralisierung soll als Bedingung für die Etablierung von dynamischen globalen Ordnungen gelten, die in der Lage sein müssen, die hohe Komplexität der Herausforderungen und Möglichkeiten von Globalisierungsprozessen besser zu erfassen oder zu bewältigen. Das Verlangen nach einer Pluralisierung des kosmopolitischen Ideals wird anhand einer doppelten Strategie entwickelt werden. Zum einen geht es um das von Kant universalistisch fundierte Ideal einer „Weltbürgerrechtsgemeinschaft“; zum anderen soll aber dieses Erbe zugleich problematisiert und weiterentwickelt werden am Beispiel zweier regionalen Ordnungen in Europa und Lateinamerika, die in Verbindungen zu unterschiedlichen geographischen Kontexten auftauchen und in Bereichen wie Wirtschaft, Politik, Recht u.a. zu kooperieren. Sowohl Kants Ideal des Weltbürgerrechts als auch die Konstituierung dieser spezifischen regionalen Strukturen basieren stark auf dem Ideal des Friedens und der Bedingung von Menschenrechtsdiskursen. Dies ermöglicht folgende Schlussfolgerung: Prozesse zur Erzeugung von Friedens- und Menschenrechtsdiskursen erwiesen sich als eine notwendige Bedingung für die Etablierung einer pluralen, gerechten, legitimen und effektiven normativen Ordnung im Zeitalter der Globalisierung.“ (Amos Nascimento)

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Human Rights, Human Dignity, and Cosmopolitan Ideals: Essays on Critical Theory and Human Rights (Co-Hrsg. mit Lutz-Bachmann), Ashgate, Farnham 2014.
Building Cosmopolitan Communities, Palgrave Macmillan, New York 2013.
A Matter of Discourse: Community and Communication in Contemporary Philosophies, Ashgate, Farnham 1998.
Grenzen der Moderne. Europa & Lateinamerika (Co-Editor mit Witte),  IKO Verlag, Frankfurt 1997.

Veranstaltungen:
Paper Presentation, 6. Juli 2015, 11.30 Uhr
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Clifford Ando

Professor am Department of Classics, History and Law der University of Chicago

Aufenthalt:
Juni bis Juli 2015

Forschungsprojekt:
Toleranz in der römischen Antike

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Hartmut Leppin

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.


Clifford Ando ist Professor am Department of Classics, History and Law der University of Chicago. Er forscht schwerpunktmäßig über die Geschichte von Religion, Recht und Staatlichkeit im römischen Imperium. Speziell die Kategorien Staatsbürgerschaft, Rechtspluralismus und Toleranz sowie das Verhältnis zwischen Zivilrecht, öffentlichem Recht und internationalen Recht in der römischen Rechtstradition interessieren ihn. Clifford Ando war Fellow und Gastprofessor an Universitäten in Canada, Frankreich, Deutschland, Neu Seeland, Süd Afrika und den USA. Er studierte in Princeton und promovierte an der University of Michigan.

Forschungsvorhaben:
Inwieweit kann man bereits in der römischen Antike von Toleranz und religiösem Pluralismus als Rechtfertigungsnarrativ sprechen? Die Fellowship setzt sich mit dem kaiserlichen Rom des 3. Jahrhunderts und damit einer Phase auseinander, in der beobachtet werden kann, wie sich eine stärker werdende monotheistische Religion mit universalen Ansprüchen in einer Welt einrichtet, in der das Zusammenleben verschiedener Religionen wie eine Selbstverständlichkeit erschien. In dieser Zeit fanden zum einen die ersten Christenverfolgungen statt, zum anderen wurden von Christen Argumente vorgetragen, die in der Geschichte des Toleranzgedankens eine große Rolle spielen. Der Kampf der Christen für ihre religiöse Freiheit hatte für spätere Rechtfertigungsnarrative der Toleranz eine große Bedeutung. Für eine gewisse Zeit bildete die Ermöglichung der Anbetung vieler Götter eine wichtige Rechtfertigung kaiserlicher Herrschaft im religiös diversen Reich. Was begünstigte diese neue Form der Rechtfertigung durch religiösen Pluralismus und warum endete die Phase so rasch, diese und andere Fragen sollen in dem Forschungsvorhaben diskutiert werden.   

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Empire, state and communicative action, in: Christine Kuhn (Hrsg.), Politische Kommunikation und öffentliche Meinung in der antiken Welt, Franz Steiner, Stuttgart 2012, S. 219-229.

Die Riten der Anderen, in: Mediterraneo Antico 15.1-2 2012, S. 31-50.

Pluralism and Empire, from Rome to Robert cover, in: Critical Analysis of Law: An International & Interdisciplinary Law Review 1 2014, S. 1-22.

Veranstaltungen:
Seminar mit Prof. Dr. Hartmut Leppin, 15. Juli 2015, 15 Uhr
Tolerance in Antiquity
Weitere Informationen: hier...

Prof. Dr. Markus Dubber (2015)

Professor of Law, University of Toronto

Aufenthalt:
Juni bis Juli 2015

Forschungsprojekt:
New Legal Science and the Dual Penal State

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

Markus Dubber ist Professor für Rechtswissenschaft an der University of Toronto, Kanada. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind Kriminalrecht, Rechtsgeschichte und Rechtstheorie. Gegenwärtig arbeitet der ehemalige Richter und Mitherausgeber des Oxford-Handbuchs für „Criminal Law“ an einem kritischen Vergleich und einer globalperspektivischen Zusammenführung von kontinentaleuropäischem Zivilrecht (Civil Right) und angelsächsischem Richterrecht (Common Right) und den damit verbundenen Formen von Rechtswissenschaft. Er hat in Harvard studiert und seinen Doktor in Stanford erworben.

Forschungsvorhaben:
"I plan to begin preliminary work on a long-term research project, tentatively entitled "The New Legal Science and the Dual Penal State." In this project, I hope to pursue two, related, goals: (1) to develop an approach to the study of law beyond traditional parochial boundaries and (2) to put this approach to the test in a study of contemporary penality in Western liberal democratic states. I plan to carry out the first part of this project by undertaking a historical and comparative analysis of conceptions of legal science (Rechtswissenschaft), investigating critiques of these conceptions, and then developing a modern account of legal science that absorbs these critiques and overcomes limitations of previous conceptions.  I hope thereby to help bridge the fundamental divide between the study of law in common law and civil law countries, marked by the abandonment of the project of legal science in the former and its continued pursuit in the latter, and ultimately to facilitate the transformation of law from a parochial into a global discipline." (Markus Dubber)

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Criminal Law: A Comparative Approach (Co-Hrsg. mit Hörnle), Oxford University Press 2014.
The New Police Science: The Police Power in Domestic and International Governance (Co-Hrsg. mit Valverde), Stanford University Press 2006.
Einführung in das US-amerikanische Strafrecht, Beck, München 2005.

Veranstaltungen:
Paper Presentation, 10. Juni 2015
The Schizophrenic Jury and Other Palladia of Liberty. A Critical Historical Analysis
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Ein zweiter Termin folgt.

 

Prof. Dr. Till van Rahden

Inhaber des Canada Research Chair in German and European Studies an der Université de Montréal

Aufenthalt:
Februar bis August 2015

Forschungsprojekt:
Forms, Style and Manners: Democracy as a Way of Life

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.

Till van Rahden ist Inhaber des Canada Research Chair in German and European Studies an der Université de Montréal, Kanada. Bereits seit 2010 forscht er als Research Fellow in Kooperation mit dem Exzellenzcluster “Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen” am Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind unter anderem neuere europäische und deutsche Geschichte und die Geschichte der Demokratie. In Deutschland hielt er Professuren für Geschichte in Köln und Bielefeld, wo er seinen Doktorabschluss machte.

Forschungsvorhaben:
"We are all democrats now. Yet concerns over the future viability of democracy pervade scholarly and public controversies. Today, the social sciences dominate the domain of democratic theory. In contrast, the humanities have contributed comparatively little to our understanding of democracy’s fragile and contingent nature in the past and in the present. Against this background, I aim to strengthen the role of the humanities in scholarly exchanges over the meaning, the fragility and the contingency of democracy as a way of life. The focus of the research project is not on the content of content, i.e. democratic ideas in democratic polities, but on the content of form. It therefore invites conversations about the democratic content of aesthetic forms, styles, and manners. Such an endeavor responds to the suspicion that an emphasis on democratic forms, styles, and aesthetics detracts from more urgent questions about democratic substance and procedures. Key questions of such an endeavor include: If we argue that a specific culture is an essential, if elusive bedrock for democratic polities, is it possible to identify which forms and styles stimulate, sustain and revive democracy as a way of life?” (Till van Rahden)

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Genealogie der Autorität, Texte zur politischen Ästhetik (Co-Hrsg. mit Kohns und Roussel) , Fink, München 2014.

Clumsy Democrats: Moral Passions in the Federal Republic, in: German History, Bd. 29 (2011), Nr. 3, S. 485–504.

Demokratie im Schatten der Gewalt: Geschichten des Privaten im deutschen Nachkrieg (Co-Hrsg. mit Fulda, Hoffmann und Herzog),  Wallstein-Verlag, Göttingen 2010.

Veranstaltungen:

Workshop, 21. Mai 2015
Demokratie als Lebensform? Stil und Ästhetik als Schlüsselbegriffe der politischen Theorie
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Paper Presentation, 22. Juli 2015, 11.30 Uhr
History in the House of the Hangman: How Postwar Germany Became a Key Site for the Study of Jewish History
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Samuel Müller

Doktorand an der New School for Social Science in New York

Aufenthalt:

März bis August 2014

Forschungsprojekt:
Religion in Modern Societies as Challenge to Critical Theory

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Dr. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

Samuel F. Müller is a doctoral student at the Department of Politics at the New School for Social Research in New York. His dissertation is entitled "'Judeo-Christian Mysticism' and 'Bourgeois Religion:' Reconstructing 'Religion' in Jürgen Habermas’s Critical Social Theory, from The Absolute and History to The Theory of Communicative Action." He graduated with a Diplom in Social Sciences from Humboldt University of Berlin and received a M.A. as well as an M.Phil. degree in Politics from the New School for Social Research.
Critical social and political theory, the works of Jürgen Habermas, philosophies of religion and secularism, global politics, Turkey and the Middle East

Abstract (pdf): Hier...

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
“Peace, War, and Modernity in International Relations Theory.” Transcience Journal 1/1 (2010): 33-46.

"Religion in Modern Societies as Challenge for Critical Theory: Remarks on Habermas’s Approach to Religion.” Canon Magazine (Fall 2009): http://www.canonmagazine.org/fall09/mueller.html.

“Islamisierung oder Demokratisierung in der Türkei.” Berlin Risk Brief 1 (2008): 13-17.

“Balanceakt zwischen den Extremen.” Review of Die Zukunft einer Provokation: Religion im liberalen Staat, by Karsten Fischer. E-politik.de: Onlinemagazin für Politik, Gesellschaft, und Politikwissenschaft (Aug. 19, 2011), Politisches Buch. http://www.epolitik. de/lesen/artikel/2011/balanceakt-zwischen-den-extremen/.

“Islam auf allen Feldern.” Review of Der Islam in der Gegenwart: Entwicklung und Ausbreitung, Kultur und Religion, Staat, Politik und Recht, by Werner Ende and Udo Steinbach. Welt Trends, Zeitschrift für Internationale Politik und vergleichende Studien 54 (2007): 163-165.
Religion, Secularism, and Ideology: Revitalizing an Old Controversy. Work-in-Progress presentation at the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities (Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften) in Bad Homburg, date: TBA.

Veranstaltungen:
12. Juni 2014
Paper Presentation
The Question of Transcendence in Jürgen Hambermas's Early Critical Theory
Moderation: Prof. Dr. Dr. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann
Ort: Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften, Bad Homburg

Prof. Dr. Andrew Norris

Associate Professor of Political Science and Affiliated Professor of Philosophy, University of California, Santa Barbara

Aufenthalt:

September bis Dezember 2014

Forschungsprojekt:
Ordinary Language and Second Nature: Returning to Ourselves in Hegel and Cavell

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Christoph Menke

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
Er war bereits mehrfach auf Einladung des Max-Planck-Instituts für Europäische Rechtsgeschichte (2002, 2003, 2005 und 2007) in Frankfurt und war im Jahr 2009 im Rahmen eines Workshops des Projekts „Normativität und Freiheit“ Gast des Exzellenzclusters „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“.

Andrew Norris lehrt Politikwissenschaften und Philosophie an der University of California, Santa Barbara.  Er ist der Herausgeber von The Claim to Community (Stanford University Press 2006), Politics, Metaphysics, and Death: Essays on Giorgio Agamben’s „Homo Sacer“ (Duke University Press 2005) und Mitherausgeber von Truth and Democracy (University of Pennsylvania Press 2012). Gegenwärtig arbeitet er an einer Monographie über Stanley Cavells Beiträge zur praktischen Philosophie.

Am Exzellenzcluster verfolgt Andrew Norris ein Forschungsprojekt, das im Bezug auf Hegel und Cavell die soziale Seinsweise normativer Ordnungen untersucht. Hegel und Cavell teilen die Vorstellung, dass normative Ordnungen nicht primär in der Form des Sollens, also nicht in der Gestalt von Forderungen oder Vorschriften existieren, sondern als Regeln, die soziale Praktiken konstituieren. Zugleich gehört zu sozialen Praktiken nach Hegel und Cavell wesentlich ein Moment des Nichtbewussten, Vorreflexiven, Inerten. Vor diesem Hintergrund stellt sich die Frage, wie Subjekte sich zugleich so auf die Praktiken, deren Teil sie sind, beziehen können, dass sie deren normativen Gehalt gegen seine bloß eingelebte, übliche und darin selbstverständlich scheinende soziale Gestalt zur Geltung bringen können.
Norris’ These lautet, dass Hegel dieses Problem zwar deutlich gestellt, aber nicht überzeugend gelöst hat. Und er sucht in Cavells immer wieder neuen Anläufen dazu, ein freies Verhältnis zum Gewöhnlichen zu denken, Potentiale für eine überzeugende Theoretisierung gelingender Prozesse der Subjektivierung, von denen zugleich die Transformation normativer Gehalte aus ihrer bloß eingewöhnten Alltäglichkeit in eine freie, reflexive und damit auch kritikbegründende Form abhängt.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Andrew Norris, „On Public Action: Rhetoric, Opinion, and Glory in Hannah Arendt’s The Human Condition“, Critical Horizons 14:2 (2013), S. 200-224.

Andrew Norris, „‚How Can It Not Know What It Is?‘ Self and Other in Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner“, Film-Philosophy 17:1 (2013), S. 19-50.

Andrew Norris, „The Disappearance of the French Revolution in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit“, The Owl of Minerva 44:1/2 (2013), S. 37-66.

Andrew Norris/Jeremy Elkins (Hg.), Truth and Democracy, University of Pennsylvania Press 2012.

Andrew Norris, „Das Politische als das Metaphysische und das Alltägliche“, in: G. Gebauer/F. Goppelsröder/J. Volbers (Hg.), Wittgenstein: Philosophie als ‚Arbeit an Einem selbst’, München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag 2009.

Andrew Norris, „Sovereignty, Exception, and Norm“, Journal of Law and Society 34:1 (2007), S. 31-45.

Andrew Norris (Hg.), The Claim to Community: Essays on Stanley Cavell and Political Philosophy, Stanford University Press 2006.

Veranstaltungen:

23. bis 25. Oktober 2014
Internationale Tagung des Exzellenzclusters Die Rezeptivität des Urteilens
Receiving Autonomy: On Cavell’s Perfectionism
Ort: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Gebäude "Normative Ordnungen"

5. November 2014, 18 Uhr
Vortrag
Skepticism as Practical Philosophy in the Work of Stanley Cavell
Ort: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Gebäude "Normative Ordnungen"

2. Dezember 2014, 14.30 Uhr
Paper Presentation
Ort: Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

Bildergalerie:

 

 

Prof. Dr. Markus D. Dubber (2016)

Professor of Law, University of Toronto

Aufenthalt:
Mai bis Juni 2016

Forschungsprojekt:
Rechtswissenschaft als globale Wissenschaft

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main


Markus Dubber ist Professor für Rechtswissenschaft an der University of Toronto, Kanada. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind Kriminalrecht, Rechtsgeschichte und Rechtstheorie. Gegenwärtig arbeitet der ehemalige Richter und Mitherausgeber des Oxford-Handbuchs für „Criminal Law“ an einem kritischen Vergleich und einer globalperspektivischen Zusammenführung von kontinentaleuropäischem Zivilrecht (Civil Right) und angelsächsischem Richterrecht (Common Right) und den damit verbundenen Formen von Rechtswissenschaft. Er hat in Harvard studiert und seinen Doktor in Stanford erworben.


Forschungsvorhaben (engl.):
“I’m engaged in a long-term research project on conceptions of the study of law as a global discipline. To start with, I’m interested in developing an approach to legal scholarship that straddles the long-standing divide between common law and civil law systems (New Legal Science). Most recently, I’ve begun to explore the notion of legal scholarship as engaged scholarship that devotes itself to a critical analysis of contemporary law from various perspectives, including both various interdisciplinary approaches and more traditional doctrinal analysis (Rechtsdogmatik). This conception of legal scholarship would seek to overcome the distinction between common law and civil systems by rethinking the project of “legal science” (Rechtswissenschaft), which common law scholars have largely abandoned but civil law scholars (and German jurists in particular) have continued to pursue largely unchanged since the early nineteenth century. A shared conception of legal scholarship—and of law—requires, I believe, a comparative-historical approach. I have laid out such an approach in a recent programmatic paper on “New Historical Jurisprudence,” which draws on and, at the same time, reconceptualizes and reorients the project of historical jurisprudence (historische Rechtswissenschaft) generally associated with Friedrich Carl von Savigny.
During my stay at the Forschungskolleg in May-June 2016, I look forward to discussing and advancing my work on New Historical Jurisprudence and New Legal Science with colleagues at the Normative Orders Excellence Cluster as well as at the University of Frankfurt, the Max-Planck-Institute for European Legal History, and last but not least the Fellows at the Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften in Bad Homburg.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
New Historical Jurisprudence: Legal History as Critical Analysis of Law, In: Critical Analysis of Law, Vol 2, No 1 (2015), pdf: Hier...
An Introduction to the Model Penal Code, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2. Auflage, 2015. The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law (Hrsg. mit Hörnle), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
Foundational Texts in Modern Criminal Law (Hrsg.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Criminal Law: A Comparative Approach (Co-Hrsg. mit Hörnle), Oxford University Press 2014.
Law Books in Action: Essays on the Anglo-American Legal Treatise (Hrsg. mit Fernandez), Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012.
The Handbook of Comparative Criminal Law, (Hrsg. mit Heller), Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010.
Police and the Liberal State (Hrsg. mit Valverde), Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2008.
Modern Histories of Crime and Punishment, (Hrsg. mit Farmer), Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2007.
The Sense of Justice: Empathy in Law and Punishment, New York: New York University Press, 2006.
The Police Power: Patriarchy and the Foundations of American Government, New York: Columbia University Press, 2005.
Victims in the War on Crime: The Use and Abuse of Victims’ Rights, New York: New York University Press, 2002.

Veranstaltungen:
10. Juni 2016, 11.30 Uhr
Paper Presentation
"Of Peace and Police: Household Discipline, State Punishment, and Global Governance"

Weitere Veranstaltungen werden noch bekanntgegeben

Prof. Dr. Eric Watkins

Professor für Philosophie an der University of California, San Diego

Aufenthalt:

Juni bis Juli 2014

Forschungsprojekt:
Autonomy and the Legislation of Laws in the Prolegomena

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Marcus Willaschek

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

Eric Watkins ist einer der führenden Kant-Forscher der Gegenwart und ein exzellenter Kenner der Philosophie der Neuzeit. Der Schwerpunkt seiner Forschung liegt auf den Themenfeldern Wissenschaft, Metaphysik und Philosophie des Geistes, wobei ihn vor allem die metaphysischen Implikationen und Voraussetzungen neuzeitlicher Wissenschaftskonzeptionen interessieren. Wie fruchtbar eine solche Herangehensweise ist, hat er in besonders eindrucksvoller Weise in seinem Buch Kant and the Metaphysics of Causality  (2005) gezeigt, das schnell zu einem Standardwerk geworden ist. In seinem aktuellen Forschungsprojekt geht es um die normative Dimension von Kants Naturbegriff, die er anhand der kantischen Metapher der Selbstgesetzgebung untersucht. Ein weiteres Projekt widmet sich der Aufnahme des kantischen Begriffs des Unbedingten in der Philosophie des Deutschen Idealismus und der Romantik.

Abstract:
In the Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, Kant never used the word “autonomy” or, for that matter, any of its cognates. Further, its subject matter (theoretical cognition) and primary goal (ascertaining whether metaphysics can be a science) differ significantly, at least at first glance, from the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, which concerns morality and establishing its supreme principle. It would be a mistake, however, to infer that the development of Kant’s moral philosophy runs on a track that is separate from that of his theoretical philosophy and thus that the Prolegomena is irrelevant to understanding the emergence of the notion of autonomy in the Groundwork. For Kant was writing the Prolegomena in 1782 and 1783, just as he was thinking about how to compose the metaphysics of morals that finds preliminary expression in the Groundwork. More importantly, the Prolegomena builds into its basic argument the view that reason legislates, or prescribes, laws to nature, a view that parallels the Groundwork’s claim that autonomy involves reason legislating the moral law. As a result, it is worth considering the possibility that Kant developed his doctrine of practical autonomy in the Groundwork on the basis of the parallels he discovered with the account of reason’s legislation of laws to nature while composing the Prolegomena.
To determine whether this developmental thesis is tenable, one must investigate Kant’s account of the legislation of the laws of nature in the Prolegomena and compare it to the account of autonomy that he works out in the Groundwork. But even more importantly, one must investigate the notions of normativity that are involved in both the legislation of the laws of nature, on the one hand, and practical autonomy, on the other hand. Prima facie, these theoretical and practical contexts seem very different, so it is not a trivial matter to describe the different notions that go into each notion so as to be able to determine whether there is some relatively abstract core notion that they share. I hope to make progress on this project while in Frankfurt. Marcus Willaschek, who is working on the emergence of autonomy by looking at the Naturrecht Feyerabend manuscript (written at the same time as the Prolegomena), is an ideal Gesprächspartner for this project.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Books:
Watkins, Eric, Kant and the Sciences (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) xii + 291 p.
Watkins, Eric, Kant and the Metaphysics of Causality (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005)  xiv + 451 p.
Watkins, Eric, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: Background Source Materials (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009).
Watkins, Eric, (ed.) The Divine Order, the Human Order, and the Order of Nature: Historical Perspectives (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013) xvi + 240 pages

Select Articles:
“Kant’s Theory of Physical Influx,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 77 (1995): 285-324.
 “Kant’s Third Analogy of Experience,” Kant-Studien 88 (1997): 406-441.
“Autonomy in and after Kant,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 69 (2004): 727-740.
“Kant’s Model of Causality: Causal Powers, Laws, and Kant’s Reply to Hume,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 42 (2004): 449-488.
“On the Necessity and Nature of Simples: Leibniz, Wolff, Baumgarten, and the pre-Critical Kant,” Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy 3 (2006): 261-314.
“Kant and the Myth of the Given,” Inquiry 51 (2008): 512-531.
“Kant on the Hiddenness of God,” Kantian Review 14, 1 (2009): 81-122.
“The System of Principles,” in The Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, ed. P. Guyer, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010): 151-167.

Veranstaltungen:
3. Juli 2014
Paper Presentation
Autonomy and the Legistlation of Laws in Kant's "Prologomena"
Ort: Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften, Bad Homburg

26. bis 27. Juli 2014
Workshop
Die Einheit der Natur. Kant's "Anhang zur Transzendentalen Dialektik"

Prof. Dr. James Sleeper

Lecturer an der Yale University

Aufenthalt:
Mai bis Juni 2014

Forschungsprojekt:
"Civic-republican" leadership traning in American Colleges

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

James Sleeper ist Publizist und Politikwissenschaftler. An der Yale University hält er Vorlesungen, in denen es beispielsweise um die nationale Identität der USA, Liberalismus und Demokratie geht. Hinzu kommen Lehrveranstaltungen über Journalismus. In seinem aktuellen Forschungsprojekt beschäftigt sich James Sleeper mit staatsbürgerlichem Engagement und zivilgesellschaftlichen Führungsqualitäten. Er untersucht, wie diese Tugenden an amerikanischen Colleges und Universitäten vermittelt werden. Zugleich geht er dabei der Frage nach, inwiefern und warum sich die zivilgesellschaftliche Erziehung im amerikanischen Bildungssystem gegenwärtig wandelt. James Sleeper forscht und publiziert insbesondere über die amerikanische politische Kultur, Rassenpolitik, Medien und die Hochschulausbildung. Seine Reportagen und Kommentare erschienen unter anderem in „Harper’s“, „The New Republic“, „The Nation“, „The New Yorker“, „The Washington Monthly“ und „Dissent“. Als Autor arbeitete er auch für das öffentliche Fernsehen „Public Broadcasting Service“ (PBS) und den öffentlichen Hörfunk „National Public Radio“ (NPR). Seine wissenschaftliche Laufbahn umfasst Stationen in Harvard, wo er promovierte, sowie an der New York University und der Columbia University.

Abstract:
The premises and protocols of citizen-leadership training in the United States have long been guided by a “civic-republican” model envisioned and elaborated by drafters of the American Constitution. Because their capitalist republic lacked mythical bonds of ethno-racial solidarity and sacred land, its survival depended on a critical mass of its citizens’ upholding public virtues and beliefs which neither the liberal state nor capitalist markets alone nurture or defend—the liberal state because it cannot judge strongly among different ways of life, and markets because they reward self-interested consumers and investors rather than citizens who attain personal and public dignity by moderating self-interest to advance a common good. For these reasons, American republican understandings of selfhood and of citizen-leadership had to be nurtured all the more intensively in institutions such as residential undergraduate colleges in universities that stood somewhat apart from markets and the state.
The premises and practices of civic-republican collegiate education have never been pure or entirely successful, but they did nurture the American leadership that framed the post-World War II trans-Atlantic alliance, Cold War “containment” of Communism, and made possible the American Civil-Rights movement. The breakdown of that leadership and its ethos, and the search for alternative ways to nurture citizen-leadership in an increasingly global sphere, are the subjects of my research.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Liberal Racism (Rowman & Littlefield, 2002) (First edition published by Viking/Penguin, 1997 and 1998).

The Closest of Strangers: Liberalism and the Politics of Race in New York (W. W. Norton & Co.), 1990; paperback (Norton), 1991.

In Search of New York (Transaction Books), 1988. Editor. An anthology of reportage, essays, reminiscences, and photography that was a special issue of Dissent magazine in 1987. Contributors include Irving Howe, Ada Louise Huxtable, Michael Harrington, Jim Chapin, Paul Berman, and many others.

The New Jews (Vintage paperback), 1971. Co-editor; essays by young religious radicals of the time.

Artikel in Sammelbänden:
Orwell Into the Twenty-First Century Thomas Cushman and John Rodden, eds. (Paradigm Press, 2005). Chapter: “Orwell’s Smelly Little Orthodoxies – and Ours”

A Way Out Owen Fiss, Joshua Cohen eds. (Princeton U. Press, 2003); Essay, “Against Social Engineering,” a response to an “urban removal” manifesto by Yale Law Professor. Owen Fiss.

One America? Stanley Renshon, ed. (Georgetown U. Press, 2001). Essay:“American National Identity in a Post-national Age.”

Empire City: New York Through the Centuries Kenneth Jackson and David Dunbar, eds. (Columbia U. Press, October 2002). Chapter: “Boodling, Bigotry, and Cosmopolitanism,” about New York City in the late 1980s.

Post-Mortem: The O.J. Verdict Jeffrey Abramson, editor (Basic Books, 1996). Essay, “Racial Theater,” about the public staging of the O.J. trial.

The New Republic Guide to the Candidates, 1996 Andrew Sullivan, editor (Basic Books, 1996). Essay on Bill Bradley, the non-candidate, and hisconcerns about civil society.

Blacks and Jews: Alliances and Arguments Paul Berman, editor (Delacorte, 1995). Chapter: “The Battle for Enlightenment at City College,” on CUNY Prof. Leonard Jeffries and identity politics.

Debating Affirmative Action Nicolaus Mills, editor. (Dell, 1994). Essay,“Affirmative Action’s Outer Limits.”

Tikkun Anthology Michael Lerner, editor, 1992. Essay, “Demagoguery in America: Wrong Turns in the Politics of Race.” (One of the early, classic critiques of identity politics in the American left.)

Veranstaltungen:

5. Juni 2014
Paper Presentation
"Should American Liberal-Arts Colleges Train Citizen-Leaders?", Chairs: Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst,  Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther
Ort: Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften, Bad Homburg

Prof. Dr. Merio Scattola

Professor für politische Philosophie, Universität Padua

Aufenthalt:
Juni bis August 2014

Forschungsprojekt: Politische Theologie in der Frühen Neuzeit

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Luise Schorn-Schütte

Gemeinsamer Fellow mit dem Internationalen Graduiertenkollegs „Politische Kommunikation von der Antike bis ins 20. Jahrhundert"

Merio Scattola lehrt als Professor für Politische Ideengeschichte an der Schule für Human- und Kulturwissenschaften der Universität Padua. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind die Geschichte der Naturrechtslehren, die politische Theologie und die Geschichte des politischen Denkens in der Frühen Neuzeit. Sein Buch „Dalla virtù alla scienza“, in dem er die Geschichte der akademischen Politik in Deutschland beschrieb, wurde als eines der „juristischen Bücher des Jahres 2003“ von der „Neuen Juristischen Wochenschrift“ ausgezeichnet. Merio Scattola hat das Konzept einer ›politischen Epistemologie‹ entwickelt und er untersucht mit Vorliebe die Wissensformen und die literarischen Gattungen, in denen sich die politische Sprache ausdruckt.
Als Gast des Exzellenzcluster „Normative Ordnungen“ und des Internationalen Graduiertenkollegs „Politische Kommunikation von der Antike bis ins 20. Jahrhundert“ wird Merio Scattola in Frankfurt über die erkenntnistheoretischen Voraussetzung der antiken und der modernen Naturrechtslehre, vor allem über den Begriff von Recht und Gesetz in der alten Scholastik und in der modernen Wissenschaft, und über die Frage nach der Transzendenz in den politischen Ordnungen sowohl in historischer als auch in systematischer Hinsicht forschen und lehren.


Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
Das Naturrecht vor dem Naturrecht. Zur Geschichte des ius naturae im 16. Jahrhundert, Tübingen, Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1999.

Teologia politica, Bologna, Il Mulino, 2007.

Dalla virtu alla Scienza. La fondazione e la trasformatione della disciplina politica nell'eta moderna, Mailand, Franco Angeli, 2003.

Eine innerkonfessionelle Debatte. Wie die Spanische Spätscholastik die politische Theorie des Mittelalters mit der Hilfe des Aristotelismus revidierte, in: Alexander Fidora, Johannes Fried, Matthias Lutz-Bachmann und Luise Schorn-Schütte (Hgg), Politischer Aristotelismus und Religion in Mittelalter und Früher Neuzeit, Berlin, Akademie Verlag, 2007, (Wissenskultur und Gesellschaftlicher Wandel, 23), S. 139-161.

Widerstand und Naturrecht im Umkreis von Philipp Melanchthon, in Luise Schorn-Schütte (ed.), Das Interim 1548/50. Herrschaftskrise und Glaubenskonflikt, Gütersloh, Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2005, (Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, 203) S. 459-487.

Emilio Bonfatti, Giuseppe Duso und Merio Scattola (Hgg), Politische Begriffe und historisches Umfeld in der Politica methodice digesta des Johannes Althusius, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz Verlag, (Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek), 2002.

Von der Politik zum Naturrecht. Die Entwicklung des allgemeinen Staatsrechts aus der politica architectonica, in: Jacques Krynen and Michael Stolleis (Hgg.), Science politique et droit public dans les facultés de droit européennes (XIIIe-XVIIIe siècle), Frankfurt am Main, Vittorio Klostermann, 2008, (Studien zur Europäischen Rechtsgeschichte, 229), S. 411-443.

"Models in History of Natural Law", in: Ius commune. Zeitschrift für Europäische Rechtsgeschichte, 28 (2001), S. 91-159.

Veranstaltungen:

09. Juli 2014
Referat
"Die Schule von Salamanca als Diskursgemeinschaft" im Kolloquium "Discussions about the School of Salamanca", Leitung Prof. Dr. Thomas Duve und Prof. Dr. Dr.  Matthias Lutz-Bachmann
Ort: Max Planck Institut für Europäische Rechtsgeschichte

21. Juli bis 1. August 2014
Workshop
"Das Gesetz und die Stadt", Leitung Dr. des. Andreas Wagner, Anselm Spindler und Prof. Dr. Merio Scattola

25. bis 26. Juli 2014
Referat
„Jean Bodin und das Voelkerrecht" an der Tagung „System and Order in international law", Leitung Prof. Dr. Stefan Kadelbach

22. Juli bis 1. August
Workshop
Changes of State - Politische Theorie im Übergang von Mittelalter zu Neuzeit
Ort: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

27. Oktober 2014, 16 Uhr
Vortrag
Die Naturrechtslehren im 18. Jahrhundert
Ort: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

August od. November 2014
Workshop
„Politische Kommunikation von der Antike bis ins 20. Jahrhundert“

November 2014
Vortrag im Rahmen der Arbeitstagung des Forschungsprojektes des Exzellenzczlusters "Die Bibel als norma normans"

Wintersemester 2014/15
Gastvortrag im Rahmen der Vorlesung Prof. Dr. Schorn-Schütte
Die Entstehung des Naturrechts im europäischen 18. Jahrhundert

Prof. Dr. Seyla Benhabib

Eugene Meyer Professorin für Politische Wissenschaften und Philosophie an der Yale University

Aufenthalt:
Juni bis Juli 2010, Mai bis Juli 2014

Forschungsprojekt:
„Democratic Sovereignty and Transnational Law“

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

Nachdem sich Seyla Benhabib bei ihrem ersten Aufenthalt als Fellow des Exzellenzclusters am Forschungskolleg im Jahr 2010 mit einer theoretischen Fundierung der Menschenrechte beschäftigt hat, geht sie nun der Frage nach, ob Demokratien angesichts länderübergreifender Ordnungen noch als souverän bezeichnet werden können. Insbesondere tritt dabei die Frage in den Vordergrund, wie sich universelle Prinzipien der Menschenrechte mit demokratischen Staatsbürgerrechten versöhnen lassen. Ihre aktuellen Untersuchungen sollen in ein neues Buch einfließen. Darin will die Philosophin zeigen, dass transnationale Normen der Menschenrechte die demokratische Souveränität letztlich eher stärken als schwächen.

Seyla Benhabib ist seit 1995 Mitglied der American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Von 2006 bis 2007 war sie Präsidentin der American Philosophical Association (Eastern Division). Sie ist Mitglied im "editorial advisory board" der Zeitschrift "Ethics & International Affairs" sowie Mitherausgeberin der "Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik". Neben ihrer Lehrtätigkeit u. a. an der Harvard University und der New School for Social Research nahm sie zahlreiche Forschungsaufenthalte in Europa wahr. So folgte sie u. a. im Jahr 2009 einer Einladung ans Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin. Als Mitglied des wissenschaftlichen Beirats ist die Philosophin auf besondere Weise mit dem Exzellenzcluster verbunden.

Zu den Preisen, mit denen Seyla Benhabib ausgezeichnet wurde, gehört der Ernst-Bloch-Preis des Jahres 2009. Die Jury würdigte sie als „Politische Philosophin von Weltformat“. Im Jahr 2012 erhielt sie den Dr. Leopold Lucas-Preis der Universität Tübingen. Die Tübinger Evangelisch-Theologische Fakultät, die diesen Preis vergibt, hob hervor, dass im Mittelpunkt des Denkens von Seyla Benhabib die diskursethische Begründung und Durchsetzung eines „Menschenrechts auf Gastfreundschaft“ stehe. Am 19. Mai wurde ihr an der Universität zu Köln ist der Meister Eckhart Preis verliehen. Hier würdigte die Jury die denkerischen Vorstöße von Seyla Benhabib zur Etablierung eines transnationalen Rechtsverständnisses. Wie nur wenige Philosophen stelle sie sich der neuen Verantwortung, die im Zeitalter "postnationaler Konstellationen" erwachse. Die Laudatio hielt Rainer Forst, Professor für Politische Theorie und Philosophie sowie Co-Sprecher des Exzellenzclusters.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):

Critique, Norm and Utopia. A Study of the Normative Foundations of Critical Theory, New York: Columbia University Press 1986 (dt.: Kritik, Norm und Utopie, Fischer Verlag 1992).

Situating the Self. Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics, Cambridge: Polity Press 1992 (dt.: Selbst im Kontext, Suhrkamp Verlag 1995).

zusammen mit Judith Butler, Drucilla Cornell and Nancy Fraser: Feminist Contentions: A Philosophical Exchange, London: Routledge 1994 (dt.: Der Streit um Differenz, Fischer Verlag 1993).

The Reluctant Modernism of Hannah Arendt, Lanham, Maryland 1996; neu veröffentlicht in 2002 (dt.: Hannah Arendt und die melancholische Denkerin der Moderne, Suhrkamp Verlag 2006).

The Claims of Culture. Equality and Diversity in the Global Era, Princeton University Press 2002.

The Rights of Others. Aliens, Citizens and Resident, Cambridge University Press 2004 (dt.: Die Rechte der Anderen, Suhrkamp Verlag 2008).

Another Cosmopolitanism. Hospitality, Sovereignty and Democratic Iterations, Oxford University Press in 2006 (dt.: Kosmopolitismus und Demokratie, Campus Verlag 2008).

Dignity in Adversity. Human Rights in Troubled Times, Polity Press 2011.

Equality and Difference. Human Dignity and Popular Sovereignty in the Mirror of Political Modernity (Lucas prize Lecture in English and German: Mohr Siebeck Publishers, 2013).

The Democratic Disconnect. Citizenship and Accountability in the Transatlantic Community, with David Cameron et. al., Transatlantic Academy, Washington DC, 2013.

Veranstaltungen (Auswahl):


4. Juni 2014, 19.30 Uhr
Vortrag im Rahmen des hundertjährigen Jubiläums der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

"Der ethisch-politische Horizont der Kritischen Theorie: Gestern und heute"
Ort: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
Campus Westend, HZ 5
Veranstalter: Exzellenzcluster „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“
Weitere Informationen: Hier...







13. Juni 2014
Vortrag im Rahmen der Klausurtagung der Principal Investigators des Exzellenzclusters "Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen"

"From the ,Right to Have Rights' to the ,Critique of Humanitarian Reason' against the Cynical Turn in Human Rights Discourse"
Ort: Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
Veranstalter: Exzellenzcluster „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen"
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

30. Juni 2014, 19.30 Uhr
"Die Ungehaltenen"
Lesung mit Deniz Utlu. Einführung von Seyla Benhabib. Ein Abend über Literatur, Migration und Menschwürde
Ort: Galerie Bernhard Knaus Fine Art
Niddastr. 84, 1. Stock, Frankfurt am Main


Prof. Dr. Christopher Clark

Professor für Neuere Europäische Geschichte, Cambridge University

Aufenthalt:
Juni 2009, Mai 2014

Forschungsprojekt:
„Europe and the Beginning of World War I“

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir

Die Fellowship findet statt in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main. Der Aufenthalt wird auch gefördert durch das Historische Kolleg.

Christopher Clark ist gemeinsamer Fellow des Exzellenzclusters "Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen" und des Historischen Kollegs am Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main. Clark war bereits im Jahr 2009 auf Einladung des Exzellenzclusters Fellow am Forschungskolleg in Bad Homburg.

Christopher Clark lehrt als Professor für Neuere Europäische Geschichte am St. Catharine's College in Cambridge. Einer seiner Forschungsschwerpunkte ist die Geschichte Preußens. Der gebürtige Australier ist Autor einer Biographie über Kaiser Wilhelm II. Für sein Buch „Preußen“ erhielt er 2007 den Wolfson Prize sowie 2010 als erster nicht-deutschsprachiger Historiker den Preis des Historischen Kollegs München, bekannt als „Deutscher Historikerpreis“. Für sein jüngstes Werk „Die Schlafwandler. Wie Europa in den Ersten Weltkrieg zog“ erhielt Clark im Frühjahr 2014 den Bruno-Kreisky-Preis für das Politische Buch.

Über einen langen Zeitraum hinweg ging die Forschung intensiv der Frage nach, inwieweit das politische und intellektuelle Klima des Kaiserreichs eine besondere Verantwortung für die Eskalation des militärischen Konflikts und den Ausbruch des Ersten Weltkriegs trug oder ihn sogar anstrebte. Christopher Clark diskutiert in öffentlichen Veranstaltungen und wissenschaftlichen Kolloquien in Frankfurt und Bad Homburg über den gegenwärtigen Stand der Debatte zum Wechselspiel zwischen Mentalitäten und kurzlebigen Ereignisfolgen vor dem Hintergrund seiner eigenen Forschungsergebnisse.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):

The Sleepwalkers. How Europe went to War in 1914, Allen Lane, London u. a. 2012 (dt.: Die Schlafwandler. Wie Europa in den Ersten Weltkrieg zog, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, München 2013).

Kaiser Wilhelm II. A life in power, Penguin, London 2009.

Kaiser Wilhelm II, Longman, Harlow u. a. 2000 (dt.: Wilhelm II. Die Herrschaft des letzten deutschen Kaisers. Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, München 2008).

Iron Kingdom. The Rise and Downfall of Prussia, 1600–1947, Allen Lane, London u. a. 2006 (dt.: Preußen. Aufstieg und Niedergang. 1600–1947, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, München 2007).

The politics of conversion. Missionary Protestantism and the Jews in Prussia, 1728–1941, Clarendon Press, Oxford u. a. 1995.

Veranstaltungen:

22. bis 23. Mai 2014
Internationale Tagung
Europa 1914. Der Weg ins Unbekannte
Mit Prof. Dr. Christopher Clark (Cambdrige Unviversity) u. a.
Ort: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main und Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften in Bad Homburg v. d. H.
Veranstalter: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main – Lehrstuhl für Neueste Geschichte in Kooperation mit dem Exzellenzcluster „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“, dem Historischen Kolleg im Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften und weiteren Partnern

26. Mai 2014, 19 Uhr
Frankfurter Stadtgespräch XV
Wer hat angefangen? Sinn und Unsinn historischer Schuldzuschreibungen
Prof. Dr. Christopher Clark (Cambridge University) im Gespräch mit Prof. Dr. Christoph Cornelißen (Assoziiertes Mitglied des Exzellenzclusters „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“ und Professor für Neueste Geschichte, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main)
Moderation: Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther (Co-Sprecher des Exzellenzclusters „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“ und Professor für Rechtstheorie, Strafrecht und Strafprozessrecht, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main)
Ort: Historisches Museum Frankfurt am Main
Veranstalter: Exzellenzcluster „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“ mit dem Kulturamt der Stadt Frankfurt am Main

Weitere Informationen: Hier...

29. Mai 2014, 18 Uhr
Vortrag im Rahmen des hundertjährigen Jubiläums der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
Prof. Dr. Christopher Clark (Cambridge University)
Das Wilhelminische Deutschland und die Universität Frankfurt: Der Kontext des Kriegsjahres
Ort: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Campus Westend, HZ 1
Veranstalter: Exzellenzcluster „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“

Fellows des Exzellenzclusters "Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen"

2019

Prof. Dmitri Nikulin in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
August bis Oktober 2019
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Sanjay G. Reddy in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
15. Juni bis 16. August 2019
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Thomas Crocker in cooperation with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
26. Mai bis 14. Juli 2019
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Betcy Jose, PhD in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Nicole Deitlehoff
Januar bis April 2019
Weitere Informationen: Hier..

 

2018

Lucy Jeannette Bermúdez Bermúdez in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther
3. bis 15. November 2018
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Norbert Frei in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Sybille Steinbacher
1. November 2018 bis 28. Februar 2019
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Awet T. Weldemichael in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir
September bis Oktober 2018
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Dr. Heloise Weber in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Gunther Hellmann
Juni bis September 2018
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Dr. Martin Weber in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Gunther Hellmann
Juni bis September 2018
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Lucian Ashworth in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Jens Steffek
Juni bis Juli 2018
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Jim Ritter in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Annette Warner (Imhausen)
April 2018
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

 

2017

Dr. Amy Hondo in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
Oktober 2017 bis Dezember 2018
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Uchenna Okeja in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Dr. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann
Oktober 2017 bis Januar 2018
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Maria Kaiafa-Gbandi in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther
Oktober bis Dezember 2017
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Iain Macdonald in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Christoph Menke
Mai bis August 2017
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Till van Rahden in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir
Januar bis August 2017
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Casiano Hacker-Cordón in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
November 2016 bis Juli 2017
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

 

2016

Dr. Christophe Schmit in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Moritz Epple
Oktober 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Friedrich Kratochwil in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Gunther Hellmann
Oktober bis November 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Julia Roos in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir
August bis Dezember 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Markus D. Dubber in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther
Mai bis Juni 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Dr. Brian Milstein in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
Januar bis September 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Dr. Luke Ulas
Oktober 2015 bis September 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier... 

Prof. Dr. José Brunner (University Tel Aviv) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther und Prof. Dr. Axel Honneth
Juni bis Juli 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

 

2015

Prof. Dr. Till van Rahden (Université de Montréal) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir
Februar bis August 2015
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Emmanuel Melissaris (London School of Economics) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther
Mai bis Juni
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Clifford Ando (University of Chicago), in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Hartmut Leppin
Mai bis Juni
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Markus D. Dubber (University of Toronto) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther
Juni bis Juli
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

 Prof. Dr. Amos Nascimento (University of Washington, Tacoma/Seattle) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Dr. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann
Juni bis Juli
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. José Brunner (University Tel Aviv) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther und Prof. Dr. Axel Honneth
Juni bis Juli
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Friedrich Kratochwil in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Jens Steffek
Juni bis Juli
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Dmitri Nikulin (New School for Social Research in New York) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
August 2015 bis Januar 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Dr. Luke Ulas
Oktober 2015 bis September 2016
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

 

2014

Samuel F. Müller, M. Phil. (Doktorand am Fachbereich Politikwissenschaft an der New School for Social Research in New York) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Dr. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann
März bis August 2014
Forschungsprojekt: Religion in Modern Societies as Challenge to Critical Theory
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Christopher Clark (Professor für Neuere Europäische Geschichte, Cambridge University) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Andreas Fahrmeir
Mai 2014
Forschungsprojekt: Wie Europa in den Ersten Weltkrieg zog
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Seyla Benhabib (Yale University) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
Mai bis Juli 2014
Forschungsprojekt: Democratic Sovereignty and Transnational Law
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. James Sleeper (Yale University) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst
Mai bis Juni 2014
Forschungsprojekt: "Civic-republican" leadership traininig in American Colleges
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Eric Watkins (University of California, San Diego) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Marcus Willaschek
Juni bis Juli 2014
Forschungsprojekt: Autonomy and the Legislation of Laws in the Prolegomena
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Merio Scattola (Universität Padua) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Luise Schorn-Schütte
Juni bis August 2014
Forschungsprojekt: Politische Theologie in der Frühen Neuzeit
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Markus D. Dubber (University of Toronto) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther
Juli 2014
Forschungsprojekt: New Legal Science and the Dual Penal State
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. Dr. Andrew Norris (University of California, Santa Barbara) in Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Christoph Menke
September bis Dezember 2014
Forschungsprojekt: "Ordinary Language and Second Nature: Returning to Ourselves in Hegel and Cavell”
Weitere Informationen: Hier...


Aktuelles

Aus aktuellem Anlass

Weitere Informationen zur Konferenz "Das islamische Kopftuch – Symbol der Würde oder der Unterdrückung?" unter Leitung von Prof. Dr. Susanne Schröter am 8. Mai 2019. Hier...

Leibniz-Preis 2019 für Ayelet Shachar

Prof. Dr. Ayelet Shachar, Direktorin am Max-Planck-Institut zur Erforschung multireligiöser und multiethnischer Gesellschaften in Göttingen und Principal Investigator des Exzellenzclusters "Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen", ist Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz-Preisträgerin 2019. Mehr...

Nächste Termine

20. Mai 2019, 18.15 Uhr

Frankfurter Philosophinnen*-Kolloquium: Lea Watzinger. Mehr...

21. Mai 2019, 18 Uhr

Frankfurter Kolloquium für Internetforschung VII: Colin Bennett: The Encoded Voter: Data Driven Elections in Western Democracies. Mehr...

22. Mai 2019, 19 Uhr

Buchvorstellung und Podiumsdiskussion: Das Humboldt Forum und die Ethnologie. Mit: Prof. em. Dr. Karl-Heinz Kohl, Johann Michael Möller und Prof. Gereon Sievernich. Moderation: Dr. Eva Charlotte Raabe. Mehr...

-----------------------------------------

Neueste Medien

Das islamische Kopftuch – Symbol der Würde oder der Unterdrückung? - Teil I

Konferenz des Frankfurter Forschungszentrums Globaler Islam am Exzellenzcluster „Normative Ordnungen“ an der Goethe-Universität

Fragile Zeitlichkeiten

Lisa Gotto
Vorlesungsreihe "Fragile Kooperationen: Produktionskrisen des Kinos"

Neueste Volltexte

Kettemann, Matthias; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; Senges, Max (2018):

The Time is Right for Europe to Take the Lead in Global Internet Governance. Normative Orders Working Paper 02/2018. Mehr...

Kettemann, Matthias (2019):

Die normative Ordnung der Cyber-Sicherheit: zum Potenzial von Cyber-Sicherheitsnormen. Normative Orders Working Paper 01/2019. Mehr...