克尔凯郭尔、李普曼和数字时代的幽灵公众

IF 0.5 3区哲学 0 RELIGION

JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS Pub Date : 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1111/jore.12474

John P. Haman

{"title":"克尔凯郭尔、李普曼和数字时代的幽灵公众","authors":"John P. Haman","doi":"10.1111/jore.12474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Søren Kierkegaard and Walter Lippmann wrote in very different times and places but both characterized the public as a “phantom.” Importantly, each did so within the context of a broader analysis that linked the press with specific notions about the public and democracy. This paper highlights the specific characteristics of the press that each thinker believed were responsible for the construction of the phantom public and its effects. While taking seriously the differences between Kierkegaard and Lippmann, in both their respective sociopolitical contexts and their formulations of the public and the press, this paper applies their critiques to a vastly different media terrain than either thinker could have envisioned.</p>","PeriodicalId":45722,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","volume":"52 3","pages":"308-329"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jore.12474","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kierkegaard, Lippmann, and the Phantom Public in a Digital Age\",\"authors\":\"John P. Haman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jore.12474\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Søren Kierkegaard and Walter Lippmann wrote in very different times and places but both characterized the public as a “phantom.” Importantly, each did so within the context of a broader analysis that linked the press with specific notions about the public and democracy. This paper highlights the specific characteristics of the press that each thinker believed were responsible for the construction of the phantom public and its effects. While taking seriously the differences between Kierkegaard and Lippmann, in both their respective sociopolitical contexts and their formulations of the public and the press, this paper applies their critiques to a vastly different media terrain than either thinker could have envisioned.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45722,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS\",\"volume\":\"52 3\",\"pages\":\"308-329\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jore.12474\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.12474\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.12474","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

索伦-克尔凯郭尔（Søren Kierkegaard）和沃尔特-李普曼（Walter Lippmann）的写作时间和地点截然不同，但他们都将公众描述为 "幽灵"。重要的是，他们都是在更广泛的分析背景下这样做的，这种分析将新闻与关于公众和民主的特定概念联系在一起。本文强调了两位思想家都认为是新闻界的具体特点造成了幽灵公众的形成及其影响。本文在认真对待克尔凯郭尔和李普曼在各自的社会政治背景及其对公众和新闻的表述上存在的差异的同时，将他们的批评应用于一个与两位思想家所设想的大相径庭的媒体环境中。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Kierkegaard, Lippmann, and the Phantom Public in a Digital Age

Søren Kierkegaard and Walter Lippmann wrote in very different times and places but both characterized the public as a “phantom.” Importantly, each did so within the context of a broader analysis that linked the press with specific notions about the public and democracy. This paper highlights the specific characteristics of the press that each thinker believed were responsible for the construction of the phantom public and its effects. While taking seriously the differences between Kierkegaard and Lippmann, in both their respective sociopolitical contexts and their formulations of the public and the press, this paper applies their critiques to a vastly different media terrain than either thinker could have envisioned.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS RELIGION-

CiteScore

0.80

自引率

25.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Founded in 1973, the Journal of Religious Ethics is committed to publishing the very best scholarship in religious ethics, to fostering new work in neglected areas, and to stimulating exchange on significant issues. Emphasizing comparative religious ethics, foundational conceptual and methodological issues in religious ethics, and historical studies of influential figures and texts, each issue contains independent essays, commissioned articles, and a book review essay, as well as a Letters, Notes, and Comments section. Published primarily for scholars working in ethics, religious studies, history of religions, and theology, the journal is also of interest to scholars working in related fields such as philosophy, history, social and political theory, and literary studies.