{"title":"谁需要待在外面?","authors":"R. Jaster, G. Keil","doi":"10.1515/dzph-2022-0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Special Focus on invitation policy at universities contains a target article by Romy Jaster and Geert Keil, five commentaries, and a response. The question under discussion is what disqualifies a person from being invited to speak at a university. On liberal, Millian approaches, the epistemic benefits of free speech preclude no-platforming policies. More restrictive approaches demand the exclusion of speakers who are considered racist or otherwise hostile against marginalized groups. Jaster and Keil take a virtue-based approach to invitation policy: A person is ineligible as a speaker if she exhibits specific intellectual vices that are detrimental to the pursuit of truth, the university’s raison d’être. The five critics raise various concerns. Birgit Recki deems the virtue-based approach too restrictive: It is prone to exclude some speakers who make intellectually stimulating contributions. Eva von Redecker and Daniel Loick deem the criterion too permissive: It allows for contributions that should have no place on campus. Dieter Schönecker and Maria-Sibylla Lotter object that the approach is silent on all recent actual cases of ‘cancelling’ at universities. In their response, Jaster and Keil address these concerns and clarify their position.","PeriodicalId":54099,"journal":{"name":"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE","volume":"70 1","pages":"474 - 491"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wer muss draußen bleiben?\",\"authors\":\"R. Jaster, G. Keil\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/dzph-2022-0029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The Special Focus on invitation policy at universities contains a target article by Romy Jaster and Geert Keil, five commentaries, and a response. The question under discussion is what disqualifies a person from being invited to speak at a university. On liberal, Millian approaches, the epistemic benefits of free speech preclude no-platforming policies. More restrictive approaches demand the exclusion of speakers who are considered racist or otherwise hostile against marginalized groups. Jaster and Keil take a virtue-based approach to invitation policy: A person is ineligible as a speaker if she exhibits specific intellectual vices that are detrimental to the pursuit of truth, the university’s raison d’être. The five critics raise various concerns. Birgit Recki deems the virtue-based approach too restrictive: It is prone to exclude some speakers who make intellectually stimulating contributions. Eva von Redecker and Daniel Loick deem the criterion too permissive: It allows for contributions that should have no place on campus. Dieter Schönecker and Maria-Sibylla Lotter object that the approach is silent on all recent actual cases of ‘cancelling’ at universities. In their response, Jaster and Keil address these concerns and clarify their position.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"474 - 491\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/dzph-2022-0029\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/dzph-2022-0029","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要《对大学邀请政策的特别关注》包含Romy Jaster和Geert Keil的一篇目标文章、五篇评论和一篇回应。正在讨论的问题是,是什么使一个人失去了在大学演讲的资格。在自由主义、米利安主义的方法中,言论自由的认识利益排除了无平台化政策。更具限制性的做法要求将被视为种族主义者或对边缘化群体怀有敌意的发言者排除在外。Jaster和Keil对邀请政策采取了基于美德的方法:如果一个人表现出不利于追求真理的特定智力缺陷,即大学存在的理由,那么她就没有资格成为演讲者。五位评论家提出了各种各样的担忧。Birgit Recki认为基于美德的方法限制性太强:它倾向于排除一些在智力上做出激励贡献的演讲者。Eva von Redecker和Daniel Loick认为这一标准过于宽松:它允许在校园里没有立足之地的捐款。Dieter Schönecker和Maria Sibylla Lotter反对这种做法对最近所有大学“取消”的实际案例保持沉默。Jaster和Keil在答复中谈到了这些关切并阐明了他们的立场。
Abstract The Special Focus on invitation policy at universities contains a target article by Romy Jaster and Geert Keil, five commentaries, and a response. The question under discussion is what disqualifies a person from being invited to speak at a university. On liberal, Millian approaches, the epistemic benefits of free speech preclude no-platforming policies. More restrictive approaches demand the exclusion of speakers who are considered racist or otherwise hostile against marginalized groups. Jaster and Keil take a virtue-based approach to invitation policy: A person is ineligible as a speaker if she exhibits specific intellectual vices that are detrimental to the pursuit of truth, the university’s raison d’être. The five critics raise various concerns. Birgit Recki deems the virtue-based approach too restrictive: It is prone to exclude some speakers who make intellectually stimulating contributions. Eva von Redecker and Daniel Loick deem the criterion too permissive: It allows for contributions that should have no place on campus. Dieter Schönecker and Maria-Sibylla Lotter object that the approach is silent on all recent actual cases of ‘cancelling’ at universities. In their response, Jaster and Keil address these concerns and clarify their position.
期刊介绍:
Als offenes Diskussionsforum fördert die Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie den schulübergreifenden Dialog und die Kommunikation zwischen den philosophischen Kulturen. Vorrangig erscheinen Arbeiten, die aktiv in die moderne internationale philosophische Diskussion eingreifen und neue Denkansätze für sie liefern. Neben Fachaufsätzen und Essays, Interviews und Symposien publiziert die Zeitschrift Funde aus philosophischen Archiven, Diskussionen sowie Buchkritiken.