Graduate studies at Western
Ethics and Information Technology 2 (2):91-97 (2000)
|Abstract||In response to the attractive moral and politicalmodel of cosmopolitanism, this paper offers anoverview of some of the conceptual limitations to thatmodel arising from computer-mediated, interest-basedsocial interaction. I discuss James Bohman''sdefinition of the global and cosmopolitan spheres andhow computer-mediated communication might impact thedevelopment of those spheres. Additionally, I questionthe commitment to purely rational models of socialcooperation when theorizing a computer-mediated globalpublic sphere, exploring recent alternatives. Andfinally, I discuss a few of the political andepistemic constraints on participation in thecomputer-mediated public sphere that threaten thecosmopolitan ideal.``Nature should be thanked for fostering socialincompatibility, enviously competitive vanity, andinsatiable desires for possessions and even power.Without these desires, all man''s excellent naturalcapacities would never be roused to develop.'''' Theultimate destiny for mankind, according to Kant whowrote these words in 1784, is to achieve through theuse of reason a `cosmopolitan existence'' or ``thematrix within which all the original capacities of thehuman race may develop.'''' Ironically, however, as Habermas andothers have realized, Kant''s carefully developedvision for `perpetual peace'' among nations and `worldcitizenship'' is now murky even as the electronicallymediated infrastructure of that matrix is rapidlydeveloping. Globalization as a process has intensifiedto the point where a new social, political, andeconomic condition has taken hold in the global arena.Recently this condition has been termed ``globality'''' –a term denoting a networked world characterized byspeed, mobility, risk, insecurity, andflexibility. And a debate is forming around thequestion of whether we are still in late modernity andexperiencing the culmination of modernity''s inherentlyglobalizing tendency or instead we have entered thenetworked age, in which the tension between collectiveand transformative identities and the networking logicof dominant institutions and organizations heralds theend of civil society. Inthis paper assume the latter but wish to explorefurther the political and epistemic constraints onparticipation in the computer-mediated public sphere.These constraints seem certain to impact the viabilityof a cosmopolitan public sphere. In the first sectionI shall discuss James Bohman''s definition of theglobal and cosmopolitan spheres and howcomputer-mediated communication (hereafter CMC) mightimpact the development of those spheres. In the secondsection, I question the commitment to purely rationalmodels of social cooperation when theorizing a globalpublic sphere. I explore recently proposed alternativeways of thinking about this issue in section three.And finally, I discuss a few of the political andepistemic constraints on participation in thecomputer-mediated public sphere that threaten thecosmopolitan ideal.|
|Keywords||civil society computer-mediated social interaction cosmopolitanism globality public sphere|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Gillian Allard (2003). Brokers and Bricoleurs: Entrepreneurship in Wales' Online Music Scene. [REVIEW] AI and Society 17 (1):12-24.
Asaf Bar-Tura (2010). Arendt, Habermas and Facebook: Participation and Discourse in Cyber Public Spheres. Humanities and Technology Review 29:1-25.
Hsin-I. Liu (2006). The Impossibility of the Public. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 2:119-124.
Cristina Bicchieri & Azi Lev-On (2007). Computer-Mediated Communication and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas: An Experimental Analysis. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (2):139-168.
John S. Brady (2004). No Contest? Assessing the Agonistic Critiques of Jürgen Habermas’s Theory of the Public Sphere. Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (3):331-354.
J. Bohman (1998). The Globalization of the Public Sphere. The Modern Schoolman 75 (2):101-117.
Pauline Kleingeld (1998). Kant's Cosmopolitan Law: World Citizenship for a Global Order. Kantian Review 2:72-90.
Jens Steffek (2010). Public Accountability and the Public Sphere of International Governance. Ethics and International Affairs 24 (1):45-68.
Jeanne Cornillon & Duska Rosenberg (2007). Experiment in Social Intelligence Design. AI and Society 22 (2):197-210.
Codruţa Cuceu (2011). Milestones in the Critique of the Public Sphere: Dewey and Arendt. Journal for Communication and Culture 1 (2):99-110.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #189,403 of 738,451 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 738,451 )
How can I increase my downloads?