Publikation: ANTi-Human : The Ethical Blindspot
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
In his writings on the gunman, Bruno Latour (1994) paraphrases the anti-human ideology of the National Rifle Association of the USA. Amongst a long list of stances one can find nonsense such as: “One is born a good citizen or a criminal. Period.” I will not suggest that Latour is an advocate in favor of the NRA's strange cause or in favor of their ideology. Nevertheless, will I use this example to point out the biggest flaw in the so called Actor-Network Theory – or at least Latour's version of ANT: The absolute ignorance to ethical doubts towards that specific approach of describing our world and what ONE calls society. I will bring forth this argument using not much more than this one example, this absolute negation of ethical philosophy and humane thought. I will therefore use a very fundamentalist approach to ethics, as it was developed by Emanuel Levinas (1988). Within this framework it will become obvious why ANT may be a good tool to describe technical processes within a society, but will always fail to explain the human side of things.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
SCHREIBER, Michel, 2017. ANTi-Human : The Ethical Blindspot. In: SPÖHRER, Markus, ed., Beate OCHSNER, ed.. Applying the Actor-Network Theory in Media Studies. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2017, pp. 266-276. ISBN 978-1-5225-0616-4. Available under: doi: 10.4018/978-1-5225-0616-4.ch016BibTex
@incollection{Schreiber2017ANTiH-39369,
year={2017},
doi={10.4018/978-1-5225-0616-4.ch016},
title={ANTi-Human : The Ethical Blindspot},
isbn={978-1-5225-0616-4},
publisher={IGI Global},
address={Hershey, PA},
booktitle={Applying the Actor-Network Theory in Media Studies},
pages={266--276},
editor={Spöhrer, Markus and Ochsner, Beate},
author={Schreiber, Michel}
}RDF
<rdf:RDF
xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" >
<rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/39369">
<dc:contributor>Schreiber, Michel</dc:contributor>
<dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/38"/>
<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
<dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2017-06-23T13:49:38Z</dcterms:available>
<dcterms:issued>2017</dcterms:issued>
<dc:creator>Schreiber, Michel</dc:creator>
<dcterms:title>ANTi-Human : The Ethical Blindspot</dcterms:title>
<dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">In his writings on the gunman, Bruno Latour (1994) paraphrases the anti-human ideology of the National Rifle Association of the USA. Amongst a long list of stances one can find nonsense such as: “One is born a good citizen or a criminal. Period.” I will not suggest that Latour is an advocate in favor of the NRA's strange cause or in favor of their ideology. Nevertheless, will I use this example to point out the biggest flaw in the so called Actor-Network Theory – or at least Latour's version of ANT: The absolute ignorance to ethical doubts towards that specific approach of describing our world and what ONE calls society. I will bring forth this argument using not much more than this one example, this absolute negation of ethical philosophy and humane thought. I will therefore use a very fundamentalist approach to ethics, as it was developed by Emanuel Levinas (1988). Within this framework it will become obvious why ANT may be a good tool to describe technical processes within a society, but will always fail to explain the human side of things.</dcterms:abstract>
<dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2017-06-23T13:49:38Z</dc:date>
<foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
<dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/38"/>
<void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
<bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/39369"/>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>