Dr. Lonneke Peperkamp

Assistant Professor Philosophy of Law at Radboud University Nijmegen, and IRC Postdoctoral Fellow at University College Dublin

November 2019 - July 2021

In Cooperation with Prof. Rainer Forst

Funded by Niels Stensen Fellowship and IRC Government of Ireland Postdoctoral Fellowship

Lonneke Peperkamp
is Assistant Professor in Philosophy of Law at Radboud University Nijmegen, and research fellow at University College Dublin and Goethe University Frankfurt. She currently works on a two-year research project 'Claiming Subsistence Rights'. Her research interests are war and political violence, peace building, space ethics, global justice, poverty, and human rights. She is a member of the Board of Directors of EuroISME (the International Society for Military Ethics in Europe).

Research project title:
Claiming Subsistence Rights

Research abstract:
Although human rights are enshrined in international law, around 600 million people live in extreme poverty. Many consider the existence of extreme poverty in the face of abundant affluence morally problematic. The field of global distributive justice is concerned with the distribution of burdens and benefits among the global population. The main question is: What should ‘we’ (the affluent) do to address this injustice? Despite large agreement on the claim that we must, indeed, help the global poor, many people do not do that. What demands attention, therefore, is not the question of what ‘we’ should do to alleviate global poverty, but the flipside of that question: What can ‘they’ (the poor) do to secure their rights to subsistence? Potential means vary from peaceful resistance; political pressure; civil disobedience; taking resources from rightful owners; migration; to, most radically, violent resistance or war for subsistence. Such radical means are the focus of this project. The central question is: Can it be justified to claim subsistence rights by using violent means? In answering that question, this research project integrates philosophy (global justice and just war theory), human rights doctrine, and political theory.

Publications (selection):
L. Peperkamp and R. Tinnevelt (2020), ‘On the Possibility of Justified Subsistence Wars’, book chapter in: A. Chadwick and S. Egan (eds.), Poverty and Human Rights, Edward Elgar Publishing (in press).
L. Peperkamp (2020), ‘A Just and Lasting Peace after War’, book chapter in: C. Stahn et. al. (ed.), Jus Post Bellum and the Justice of Peace, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
L. Peperkamp (2016), ‘The Blurry Boundaries between War and Peace: Do we need to extend just war theory?’, Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy 102/3, 315- 332.
L. Peperkamp (2016), ‘On the Duty to Reconstruct after War: Who is responsible for jus post bellum?’, Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 29/2, 403- 430.
 L. Peperkamp (2014), ‘Jus Post Bellum: A case of minimalism versus maximalism?’, Ethical Perspectives 21/3, 255- 288.  

Presentation Political Theory Colloquium 16 June 2020

Azadeh Shabani

Ph.D. candidate of political science (political thought) at Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran Iran

November 2019 – April 2020

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Rainer Forst

Research Centre Normative Orders at Goethe University

Azadeh Shabani has a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science at Isfahan University and a Master of Arts at Tarbiat Modares University of Tehran. She is a Ph.D. candidate of political science (political thought) at Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran- Iran.
The title of her thesis is: “Analyzing the relationship between recognition and justice in the thought of “Axel honneth” and “Ali Shariati”. Following her studies at Goethe University, she wrote two chapters entitled: Deconstructing Justice from the Perspective of Recognition Theory. She also criticized Honneth's theory of Recognition based on the ideas of Rancière, Nancy Fraser, and Althusser, as well as postcolonial ideas. She will analyze this problem that non-Western other has been ignored in Honneth's thought.

Recognition as Human Being

There have been the diffrent experiences of misrecognition, malrecognition, exclusion and ignoring other and many people have been rejected and eliminated, in throughout history. The people who their sin was being different from the majority of the people. These people include women, slaves, blacks, homosexuals and etc. Concepts such as citizenship, nationalism, nation-state have many restrictions and these restrictions lead to other eliminating. Misunderstanding has always had various formations throughout history, for this reason several problem analysed here:

- Market economics educates selfish and self-interested people, the other is ignored and misrecognized in this educational structure. It seems we have reached from invisible hand to invisible man.
- Is the economic restructuring, essential for human recognition?
- What is the relation between neoliberalism and misrecognition?
- Citizenship, both in ancient Greece and in modern times, recognizes some people and ignores others.
- There are people who are not recognized in their own country or abroad; how is the status of these people in society?
- There are people today who live in camps instead of cities, How are these people recognized?

Publications (Selection):
•    “Interaction of Intellectuals with People at the Beginning of the Iranian Revolution”, International Conference on the Constitutional Movement to the Islamic Revolution of Iran, August 2014.
•    "the relationship between alienation and citizenship in the thought of Herbert Marcuse" the Journal of Research in Theoretical Politics, spring & summer 2016
•    "The Impact of Globalization on Civil Society in Iran" in the Journal of Research in Theoretical Politics, winter 2017
•    “Critical Political Economy and Amartya Sen”, Analytical -Theoretical magazine of “Iran of tomorrow”, February 2016
•    The translation of part of the book "A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy" to Persian, Edited by Robert E. Goodin, Philip Pettit and Thomas Pogge, Which is publishing

Articles title in Magazines

•    “job or housekeeping? problem is this!”, magazine “realm of welfare”,October 2016
•    “defective circle of poverty, illiteracy and Child labor”, magazine “realm of welfare”, September 2016
•    “The tragedy of child marriage”, magazine “realm of welfare”, August 2016
•    Social equity and economic development in India, magazine “Iran of tomorrow, November 2015
•    Half of the world's wealth for one percent of the world's population, site Social Security Organization of Iran
(All of these articles are available on the Iranian Social Security website and the magazine sites)


Rossella Sabia, Phd

Post-doctoral Research Fellow in Criminal Law and Teaching Assistant at the Department of Law, Luiss Guido Carli University, Rome

September 9, 2019 – September 30, 2019

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Christoph Burchard

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


Rossella Sabia is Post-doctoral Research Fellow in Criminal Law and Teaching Assistant at the Department of Law, Luiss Guido Carli University, Rome. She received her PhD in ‘Law and Business’ in 2018 at Luiss University with a thesis on “Preventing Crimes Through Organization. Anti-Corruption Compliance Programs in Europe”. Her main research interests lie in the areas of corporate criminal law, anti-corruption, environmental criminal law, counterterrorism, compliance and criminal law. Her current research is aimed at exploring the impact of new technologies and artificial intelligence on corporate compliance and criminal liability of corporations. She spent research periods in Cambridge and Nanterre and she was a visiting student at Norwegian School of Economics.

Research project title:
Compliance and New Technologies. AI Software as Tools to Prevent Corporate Crimes

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) software is an emerging trend in the prevention of crime-risk inside corporations and other complex organizations. AI software are capable to process, analyze and compare infinite amounts of data, to offer results that are simply inaccessible to human activity. The research project intends to focus on the problematic scenario of a possible (computerized) automation of compliance, moving from the consideration that, in this field, both theoretical problems and practical implications are still quite underinvestigated in the academic literature.
From the corporate criminal liability perspective, on the one hand these systems offer to corporations a potentially revolutionary tool in their compliance activities; they allow the design of compliance programs – whereas risk assessment and risk management rely on the exhaustive “mapping” of the relevant company data – which may exclude the “culpability” of the corporation, at least in those models – such as the Italian or the Spanish one – based on “organizational fault”. In addition, in the fight against corruption these tools can identify recurrent suspicious behavioral patterns which are useful to shape “tailored” red flags, different from the traditional ones – e.g. anomalies in procurement procedures, price deviations from average prices recorded in a certain commercial sector, consultancy fees, etc.
However, on the other hand, where the corporation relies entirely on the use of automation in the prevention of crime-risk, further problems related to the allocation of liability arise. May the entity be held liable for a crime that represents the “materialization” of a risk, whose non-detection solely depends on the AI software (i.e. the corporation confines itself to the use of this software)? Is there any “corporate fault”? Emblematic hypotheses might be the exclusive adoption of data analytics software in the corporate context to monitor suspicious transactions in the anti-money laundering field, or to carry out a third party due diligence in anti-corruption matters.
The use of AI software has another dark side, linked to the protection of the fundamental rights of the persons involved. As a matter of fact, one of the main risks related to the use of these instruments is that of legitimizing forms of “generalized surveillance” by corporations, with potential negative impact on employees’ rights, as well as on other people which may be affected by this computer analysis – in terms of protection of personal data and protection in case of automated processing, defensive guarantees with respect to corporate internal investigations, compliance with regulations related to control of workers.
The research is therefore aimed at analyzing benefits and risks deriving from the use of such systems, framing these practices within the “general categories” of corporate criminal liability and identifying solutions that will allow corporations and other entities to use these innovative methodologies of prevention without incurring penalties. (Rossella Sabia)

Publications (selection):
Sabia, R (2018) Preventing Crimes Through Organization. Anti-Corruption Compliance Programs in Europe (La prevenzione dei reati mediante l’organizzazione. I modelli anticorruzione nell’esperienza europea). Doctoral Thesis, pp. 1-344
Sabia, R (2018) “Responsabilità degli enti e reati ambientali al banco di prova del principio di legalità. Il caso delle fattispecie associative", Diritto penale contemporaneo – Rivista Trimestrale, 1, pp. 305-319
Sabia, R (2017) “Delitti di terrorismo e responsabilità da reato degli enti tra legalità e esigenze di effettività”, Diritto penale contemporaneo – Rivista Trimestrale, 1, pp. 208-225
Sabia, R (2017) “Historical Pollution and Corporate Liability in the Italian Criminal Law”, in S. Manacorda & F. Centonze (Eds.), Historical Pollution: Comparative Legal Responses to Corporate Environment Offences (pp. 147-176). New York: Springer

September 19, 2019 – September 21, 2019
Bad Homburg Conference 2019
Künstliche Intelligenz - Wie können wir Algorithmen vertrauen?
For further information: Click here...

Prof. Ingolf Dalferth

Professor für Religionsphilosophie, Claremont Graduate University, USA

September–November 2020

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Thomas M. Schmidt

Forschungsverbund "Normative Ordnungen" gemeinsam mit dem dem Frankfurter Institut für Religionsphilosophische Forschung (IRF) und dem Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

Ingolf Dalferth ist Danforth Professor of Philosophy of Religion an der Claremont Graduate University sowie Professor em. an der theologischen Fakultät der Universität Zürich. Von 1998 bis 2012 war er Direktor des Instituts für Hermeneutik und Religionsphilosophie der Universität Zürich. Er wurde mit zahlreichen Einladungen an renommierte Forschungsinstitutionen ausgezeichnet, u.a. als Hulsean Lecturer der University of Cambridge, Samuel Ferguson Lecturer der Manchester University, Bapsybanoo Marchioness of Winchester Lecturer an der Universität Oxford, Fellow am Collegium Helveticum in Zürich und am Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin. Die Universität Kopenhagen und die Universität Uppsala verliehen ihm die Ehrendoktorwürde. Dalferth ist bzw. war Herausgeber viele Zeitschriften und Buchreihen, darunter die Theologische Literaturzeitung, die Hermeneutische Untersuchungen zur Theologie, Philosophy of Religion and Theology und Claremont Studies in Religion.

»Deus praesens: Gott und Gegenwart in der philosophischen Theologie«

In a major strand of Western philosophical theology, God and the present are dynamically linked. The present cannot be thought without God, and God cannot be thought without his presence. Only a present God deserves to be called »God«, and a God who is not present cannot be God. Without God's presence nothing would be possible, and nothing would be actual, nothing would be there and no one else would be present. If there is a God, then God is to be thought in such a way that God is present to every presence. But what does this mean? How is God's presence different from other presences? How does this go together with the widespread feeling that God is not present, but absent, not accessible, but hidden? What do we understand by »presence« (Präsenz) and »the present« (Gegenwart), and how does this relate to presence (Anwesenheit) and absence (Abwesenheit), to givenness and perceivability, to accessibility and hiddenness? These are some of the questions I want to pursue during my stay at the FKH. (Ingolf Dalferth)

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl):
- Sünde: Die Entdeckung der Menschlichkeit. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt 2020.
- Die Kunst des Verstehens. Grundzüge einer Hermeneutik der Kommunikation durch Texte. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck 2018.
- Creatures of Possibility: The Theological Basis of Human Freedom. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic 2016.
- Transzendenz und säkulare Welt, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck 2015 (engl.: Transcendence and the Secular World: Life in orientation to ultimate presence, übersetzt von Jo Bennet, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck 2018).
- Radikale Theologie. Glauben im 21. Jahrhundert. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt 2010 (engl.: Radical Theology: An Essay on Faith and Theology in the Twenty-First Century. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press 2016).
- Hoffnung (Grundthemen der Philosophie). Berlin: de Gruyter 2016.
- Selbstlose Leidenschaften. Christlicher Glaube und menschliche Passionen. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck 2013.
- Malum. Theologische Hermeneutik des Bösen. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck 2008.
- Die Wirklichkeit des Möglichen. Hermeneutische Religionsphilosophie. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck 2003


5. November 2020, 11 Uhr
Fellow Kolloquium am Forschungskolleg Humanwissenschaften der Goethe-Universität
"In God We Trust"
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

12. November 2020, 19 Uhr
Die Illusion der Unmittelbarkeit. Über einen missverstandenen Modus der Lebenswelt
Weitere Informationen: Hier...

Prof. David M. Berry

Professor of Digital Humanities, University of Sussex, UK

1 to 15 September 2019 and 3 to 9 November 2019

In cooperation with Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther

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

Professor David M. Berry researches the theoretical and medium-specific challenges of understanding digital and computational media, particularly algorithms, software and code. His work draws on digital humanities, critical theory, political economy, social theory, software studies, and the philosophy of technology. As Professor of Digital Humanities, he is interested in how computation is being incorporated into arts and humanities and social science practice. In relation to this he is currently exploring how artificial intelligence and machine-learning are articulated in relation to arts and humanities knowledges – particularly notions of augmentating, automating and informating. More particularly, he is interested in how knowledge, organisation and computation are formed into new constellations of power. This work examines how these systems are legitimated and the orders of justification around them together with the potential of concepts such as explainability for providing immanent critique and the space for practices of critical reason.

Research project title:
Critical Theory, Artificial Intelligence and Explainability

In this research I plan to explore the implications of explainability for the critical theory, and particularly the concept of explainability it gives rise to. This is increasingly relevant to the growing public visibility of artificial intelligence and machine-learning projects and the potential for the application of machine learning drawn from these approaches. This is an extremely difficult requirement for computational systems to achieve. By situating the questions over explainability in terms of theories and concepts drawn from critical theory, such as notions of instrumental rationality, the dialectic of enlightenment, standardisation and related problems of the political economy and commodity fetishism will create an extremely deep set of philosophical and theoretical questions. For example, the question of interpretation is hugely simplified in the proposals over explainability, the question of an interpreting subject, its capacities and its relation to assumed notions of truth are also suggestive. This research explores how power and life chances are redistributed where cognitive capacities themselves are subject to the market and therefore unequally available to the public. I therefore propose to explore explainability as a normative justification and as a technical project in light of these questions, and extend the debate over explainability into questions of interpretation through a notion of “understandability”. That is, to understand how justifications from the domains of a formal, technical and causal models of explanation have replaced that of understanding and thereby give rise to tensions and social conflict. The aim is to situate the current debates over explainability within a historical constellation of concepts but also to provide an immanent critique of the claims and justifications of “smart” technologies that build on artificial and machine-learning techniques, particularly in light of their impacts on cognitive proletarianisation, political economy and what we might call the structural transformation of the informational and cognitive capacity of societies under conditions of digital technicity.

Publications (selection):

Berry, David M and Fagerjord, Anders (2017) Digital humanities: knowledge and critique in a digital age. Polity Press, Cambridge. ISBN 9780745697659

Berry, David M (2014) Critical theory and the digital. Critical theory and contemporary society. Bloomsbury, New York. ISBN 9781441166395

Berry, David M (2011) The philosophy of software: code and mediation in the digital age. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. ISBN 9780230244184

Berry, David M (2008) Copy, rip, burn: the politics of copyleft and open source. Pluto Press, London. ISBN 9780745324159


7 November 2019, 6pm
Artificial Intelligence, Explainability and Critical Theory
For further information: Click here...


Die Gegenwart der Religion und die Zukunft der Philosophie. Internationale Tagung über und mit Jürgen Habermas

Am 20. und 21. November 2020 fand die Tagung „Gegenwart der Religion - Zukunft der Philosophie. Überlegungen im Anschluss an das jüngste Werk von Jürgen Habermas“ statt. In acht Vorträgen international renommierter Wissenschaftler*innen aus der Philosophie und Theologie wurde an zwei Tagen das 2019 erschienene Werk "Auch eine Geschichte der Philosophie" mit dem Autor Jürgen Habermas diskutiert. Mehr...

Ringvorlesung "Machtverschiebung durch Algorithmen und KI"

Von Suchmaschinen bis hin zu Predictive Policing - Algorithmen und Künstliche Intelligenz verändern gesellschaftliche Strukturen und ökonomische Geschäftsmodelle. In der Ringvorlesung "Machtverschiebung durch Algorithmen und KI" werden ab dem 11. November 2020 gesellschaftliche Auswirkungen und Optionen rechtlicher Regulierung im Zusammenhabng mit KI diskutiert. Mehr...

Nächste Termine

25. Januar 2021, 18.00 Uhr

Ringvorlesung "Machtverschiebung durch Algorithmen und KI": Prof. Christiane Wendehorst (Universität Wien): Haftung für Künstliche Intelligenz – droht ein Verantwortungsvakuum? Mehr...

28. Januar 2021, 12.30 Uhr

Book lɔ:ntʃ: Pandemic Media. Preliminary Notes Towards an Inventory. With: Laliv Melamed, PhD, Philipp Dominik Keidl, PhD, Prof. Antonio Somaini and Prof. Vinzenz Hediger. More...

28. Januar 2021, 18.00 Uhr

13. FFGI Vortragsreihe: Arta Ramadan (ZDF-Reporterin): Kosovo, Deutschland und der liberale Islam. Mehr...


Neueste Medien

„Freiwilligkeit oder Zwang?“ – Experimente in den Zeiten von Infektionsschutz

Prof. Dr. Dr. Günter Frankenberg (Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Forschungsverbund "Normative Ordnungen")
Moderation: Prof. Marion Tiedtke (Hochschule für Musik und Darstellende Kunst in Frankfurt am Main)
DenkArt „Der normalisierte Ausnahmezustand“

Gesellschaft als digitale Sozialmaschine? Zur soziotechnischen Transformation des selbstbestimmten Lebens

Prof. Jörn Lamla (Universität Kassel)
Ringvorlesung "Machtverschiebung durch Algorithmen und KI"


Weitere Videoaufzeichnungen finden Sie hier...

Neueste Volltexte

Darrel Moellendorf (2020):

Hope and reasons. Normative Orders Working Paper 02/2020. Mehr...

Annette Imhausen (2021):

Sciences and normative orders: perspectives from the earliest sciences. Normative Orders Working Paper 01/2021. Mehr...