{"id":10697,"date":"2008-08-21T21:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-21T12:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2008\/08\/21\/en-philo-lacigf-2008-montevideo-kuki-iki\/"},"modified":"2008-08-21T21:00:00","modified_gmt":"2008-08-21T12:00:00","slug":"en-philo-lacigf-2008-montevideo-kuki-iki","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2008\/08\/21\/en-philo-lacigf-2008-montevideo-kuki-iki\/","title":{"rendered":"Kuki on Contingency and Iki on LACIGF 2008 Montevideo \u2014 Philosophy of contingency"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Thumbnail\"<\/p>\n

\n

This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Japanese Existential Philosophy<\/strong> \u2014 most prominently associated with Shuzo Kuki<\/strong> \u2014 to re-read the LACIGF 2008 Montevideo conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Introduction: The Problem<\/h2>\n

Kuki's The Problem of Contingency and The Structure of Iki philosophized contingency against necessity and aesthetic mode against logic. LACIGF reveals cultural diversity in how contingency is received.<\/p>\n

This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of LACIGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Philosophy of contingency<\/strong>, and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.<\/p>\n

\"Analytical<\/p>\n

Aesthetics of digital contingency<\/h2>\n

Contingent conversations and unplanned encounters at Montevideo often produce IGF's essential outcomes. The sensibility of iki rooted in Uruguay resources aesthetic calibration against risk-management bias.<\/p>\n

Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Shuzo Kuki-type problematic.<\/p>\n

The regional IGF (LACIGF) holds a philosophically distinct position as the intermediate category mediating global universality and national particularity.<\/p>\n

Ethics of iki<\/h2>\n

Shuzo Kuki's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2008 conference. We examine that application below.<\/p>\n

1. Application to "\u521d\u958b\u50ac"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u521d\u958b\u50ac" can be positioned, from the perspective of Shuzo Kuki's Philosophy of contingency<\/strong>, as a central problematic. In Uruguay's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u521d\u958b\u50ac are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

2. Application to "\u5730\u57df\u306e\u58f0"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u5730\u57df\u306e\u58f0" can be positioned, from the perspective of Shuzo Kuki's Philosophy of contingency<\/strong>, as a derivative problematic. In Uruguay's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u5730\u57df\u306e\u58f0 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

3. Application to "\u767a\u5c55"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u767a\u5c55" can be positioned, from the perspective of Shuzo Kuki's Philosophy of contingency<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Uruguay's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u767a\u5c55 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

4. Application to "\u30a2\u30af\u30bb\u30b9"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30a2\u30af\u30bb\u30b9" can be positioned, from the perspective of Shuzo Kuki's Philosophy of contingency<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Uruguay's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30a2\u30af\u30bb\u30b9 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

5. Application to "\u5730\u57df\u5354\u8abf"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u5730\u57df\u5354\u8abf" can be positioned, from the perspective of Shuzo Kuki's Philosophy of contingency<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Uruguay's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u5730\u57df\u5354\u8abf are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

\"Philosophical<\/p>\n

Implications for Executives and Practitioners<\/h2>\n

The philosophical reflection of this essay is not merely academic. The Shuzo Kuki perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Uruguay.<\/p>\n

First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Philosophy of contingency<\/strong>. Second, in dialogue with regulators and civil society, it suggests dimensions of consensus formation that purely technical arguments cannot reach. Third, it indicates that the long-term ground of business legitimacy lies not so much in technical advantage or market share as in participation in such philosophical-normative debates.<\/p>\n

Academic Positioning and Future Research<\/h2>\n

The argument of this essay attempts to graft a philosophical perspective onto the mainstream political-science and legal approaches to internet governance research. Three future research questions follow.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Verification of the applicability of Shuzo Kuki's framework to other IGF conferences<\/li>\n
  2. Comparative contrast between Japanese Existential Philosophy<\/strong> and other theoretical traditions<\/li>\n
  3. Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Uruguay<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    In particular, the third point has the potential to liberate IGF research from West-centric debate and open a more multi-layered discursive space.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Primary Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n