Fellows

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.

Projecttitle:
Recognition as Human Being

Projectdescription:
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)

 

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.

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

Projektbeschreibung:
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

Veranstaltungen:
weitere Informationen folgen

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

Abstract
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

 

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

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

Abstract
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

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

Dr. Justas Namavičius

Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter an der Universität Vilnius (Institut für Strafrecht)

9. Juli 2019 bis 18. Juli 2019

In Zusammenarbeit mit Prof. Dr. Klaus Günther

Exzellenzcluster "Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen" an der Goethe-Universität


Dr. Justas Namavičius
studierte 1997–2004 Rechtswissenschaft an der Universität Bonn (erstes Staatsexamen); später war er als wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter im Strafrechtlichen Institut der Universität Bonn tätig und absolvierte Referendardienst am Oberlandesgericht Köln (zweites Staatsexamen 2012). 2011 wurde er an der Universität Bonn promoviert (Territorialgrundsatz und Distanzdelikt, Baden-Baden, 2012). Herr Namavičius unterrichtet und forscht an der Universität Vilnius (Institut für Strafrecht) sowie am Institut für Rechtswesen (Vilnius). Ferner berät er unterschiedliche staatliche Institutionen. In seinen Publikationen und Vorträgen analysiert er die Fragen des allgemeinen Teils des Strafrechts mit den Bezügen zum Recht der Europäischen Union; ferner interessiert er sich für die Geschichte des sowjetischen Strafrechts.

Projekttitel:
Das Gesetzlichkeitsprinzip im Europäischen und im internationalen Strafrecht

Abstract
Derzeit interessiere ich mich für das Prinzip der Gesetzlichkeit, vor allem mit Bezügen zum Europäischen und dem internationalen Strafrecht. Die Europäisierung steht vor allem im Zeichen der Effektivität, das internationale Strafrecht bemüht sich hingegen um materielle Gerechtigkeit, aber auch dies nicht unbedingt (nur) retrospektiv ausgerichtet, sondern auch mit der Funktion der Selbstbestätigung im Sinne einer bestimmten Deutung von historischen Ereignissen, wie man dies teilweise auch in der aktuellen Entwicklung der litauischen Rechtsprechung im Hinblick auf die Auslegung der internationalen Kriegsverbrechen beobachten kann. Die genannten Entwicklungstendenzen stehen in einem Spannungsverhältnis zu dem formalen Gesetzlichkeitsprinzip, welches mit Blick auf seine Funktionen näher auszuleuchten ist.

Publikationen (Auswahl):

Souveränität und Integration: Verfassungsrechtliche Fragen der Mitgliedschaft Litauens in Europäischer Union [Sovereignty and Integration: Constitutional Issues with regard to the Membership of Lithuania in the European Community], co-author: Zenonas Namavičius, in: Osteuropa-Recht 2006, p. 152.

Die Reform der litauischen Verwaltungsjustiz [The Reform of the Lithuanian Administrative Justice], in: Osteuroparecht 2007, p. 21.

Hafenlichter“ [„The harbour lights”], a hypothetical criminal law case for the training purposes of students, in: Juristische Ausbildung 2007, p. 190.

Territorialgrundsatz und Distanzdelikt [The Principle of Territoriality and the Distance Offence], Baden-Baden 2012, monography [PhD Thesis].

Neuere Entwicklungen des litauischen Strafrechts [Recent Developments of the Lithuanian Criminal Law], in: Osteuroparecht 2013, p. 90.

Atsižvelgimas į užsienio valstybės teismo apkaltinamąjį nuosprendį nagrinėjant naują baudžiamąją bylą Lietuvoje [Taking into Account the Criminal Judgement of the Court of a Foreign Country in the New Criminal Proceedings in Lithuania], Teisės problemos, 2018/1 (95), p. 5.

Baudžiamieji įstatymai, galioję okupuotoje Lietuvoje 1940-1990 metais [Criminal Laws, which were in Force in the Occupied Lithuania from 1940 till 1990];  in: Lietuvos teisė 1918-2018 m.: šimtmečio patirtis, red. Sinkevičius, V.; Jakulevičienė, L, Vilnius, 2018.

Baudžiamosios teisės mokslas sovietinės okupacijos laikotarpiu [Doctrine of Criminal Law in the Period of the Soviet Occupation], in: Lietuvos teisė 1918-2018 m.: šimtmečio patirtis, red. Sinkevičius, V.; Jakulevičienė, L, Vilnius, 2018.

 


Headlines

Rainer Forst zu Corresponding Fellow der British Academy gewählt

Wie die British Academy am 24. Juli bekannt gab, wurde Prof. Rainer Forst als Corresponding Fellow aufgenommen. Jährlich wählt die British Academy herausragende Gelehrte und Wissenschaftler*innen, die sich auf dem Gebiet der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften international verdient gemacht haben zu Corresponding Fellows. Mehr...

Bundesministerin Karliczek gibt Startschuss für das neue Forschungsinstitut Gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt

In einer Pressekonferenz hat Bundesministerin Anja Karliczek am 28. Mai 2020 den Startschuss für das neue Forschungsinstitut Gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt (FGZ) gegeben. Mit dabei waren Sprecherin Prof. Nicole Deitelhoff (Goethe-Uni, Normative Orders), sowie der Geschäftsführende Sprecher Prof. Matthias Middell (Uni Leipzig) und Sprecher Prof. Olaf Groh-Samberg (Uni Bremen). Nun kann auch das Frankfurter Teilinstitut seine Arbeit aufnehmen. Mehr...

Upcoming Events

15. Oktober 2020, 12 Uhr

Frankfurter Kolloquium für Internetforschung X: Eliška Pírková (Access Now, Brüssel): An Insider’s Guide to Safeguarding Human Rights in EU Digital Policy. Mehr...

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

Latest Media

„Autoritäre Bedrohungen oder liberale Demokratie?“ – Die offene Gesellschaft im Ausnahmezustand

Prof. Wilhelm Heitmeyer
DenkArt „Der normalisierte Ausnahmezustand“


Normative Orders Insights

... with Jakob Huber

New full-text Publications

Darrel Moellendorf (2020):

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

Kettemann, Matthias (2020):

The Normative Order of the Internet. Normative Orders Working Paper 01/2020. More...