Abstract
This essay, between serious and facetious, addresses an apparently secondary implication of the planetary tragedy produced by Covid-19. It coincides with the ‘problem of the veil,’ a bone of contention in Islam/West relationships. More specifically, it will address the question of why the pandemic has changed the proxemics of public spaces and the grammar of ‘living together.’ For some time—and it is not possible to foresee how much—in many countries people cannot go out, or enter any public places, without wearing a sanitary mask. In short, almost all of us, by obligation or by urgent advice from the public authorities of the various countries, will not live the public sphere with our faces uncovered. The alteration of the social context affecting many Western countries will inevitably involve also the ‘local’ perception of the Islamic veil and—as a matter of equality—the consistency of the prohibition of wearing it. What will thus become of the ban on wearing it in public places established by some countries such as France and asseverated by the ECHR? If everyone can and will have to go around with their faces covered, why should only Islamic women be discriminated against? Will not the change in boundary conditions produced by Covid-19 also induce Western people to re-categorize the meaning of the veil? And will this re-categorization not directly affect the ‘fact’ of wearing the veil, that is, its empirical perception? And still, will this psycho-semantic change not show how empirical perceptions are cultural constructs rather than ‘objective facts,’ as such allegedly independent from the observer’s point of view? Consequentially, will the plurality of perceptions and cultural meanings related to the gesture of covering one’s own face not gain renewed relevance in determining the legitimacy of wearing the veil? The socio-semantic earthquake produced by Covid-19 compels us to rethink this and other issues orbiting around the translation of ‘facts’ into legal language; furthermore, it highlights the instrumentality of many ideological/partisan and ethnocentric assumptions passed off as objectivity regarding those alleged ‘facts.’ The essay will attempt to provide an answer to the above questions by proposing a semiotic-legal approach to intercultural conflicts and, indirectly, the pluralism in law.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11196-020-09703-y
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,756
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Enactive becoming.Ezequiel A. Di Paolo - forthcoming - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences:1-27.
Ignorantia Facti Excusat: Legal Liability and the Intercultural Significance of Greimas’ “Contrat de Véridition”.Mario Ricca - 2018 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 31 (1):101-126.

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The COVID-19 Containment in Vietnam: What Are We Doing?Toan Luu Duc Huynh - 2020 - Journal of Global Health 10 (1):010338.
Challenging the Burqa Ban.Luara Ferracioli - 2013 - Journal of Intercultural Studies 34 (1):89-101.
Interpretative Choices and Objectivity-Oriented Legal Discourse: A Strategic Analysis of the ECtHR Ruling on the French Face Veil Ban.Gustavo Just - 2016 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 29 (3):577-594.
Pertinence of a General Prohibition of the Burqa and Niqab in Spain: A Human Rights Perspective.David Fernández Rojo - 2014 - Yearbook of Humanitarian Action and Human Rights/Anuario de Acción Humanitaria y Derechos Humanos 12:209-234.
Chinese Bioethicists Speak Out on Covid‐19, and Others Follow.Susan Gilbert - 2020 - Hastings Center Report 50 (2):inside_front_cover-inside_front_.
The Arrogant Eye and the French Prohibition of the Veil.Daniel Alejandro Restrepo - 2019 - Ethic@ - An International Journal for Moral Philosophy 18 (2):159-174.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-04-30

Total views
2 ( #1,333,729 of 2,333,946 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #395,283 of 2,333,946 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes