{"id":12397,"date":"2019-06-16T16:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-06-16T07:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2019\/06\/16\/en-philo-youth-igf-germany-2019-sloterdijk-spheres\/"},"modified":"2019-06-16T16:00:00","modified_gmt":"2019-06-16T07:00:00","slug":"en-philo-youth-igf-germany-2019-sloterdijk-spheres","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2019\/06\/16\/en-philo-youth-igf-germany-2019-sloterdijk-spheres\/","title":{"rendered":"Sloterdijkian Spheres on Youth IGF Germany 2019 Berlin \u2014 Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

\n

This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Contemporary German Philosophy<\/strong> \u2014 most prominently associated with Peter Sloterdijk<\/strong> \u2014 to re-read the Youth IGF Germany 2019 Berlin conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Introduction: The Problem<\/h2>\n

Sloterdijk's Spheres trilogy argues that humans are always spatial beings needing some "interior." Youth IGF Germany can be read as an attempt to construct new "spheres" against the globalized "exterior."<\/p>\n

This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of Youth IGF Germany becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology<\/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

Construction of digital foams<\/h2>\n

Germany's national sphere, the regional sphere, and the global sphere co-exist as "foams" rather than concentric circles. Discussion of \u82e5\u8005\u53c2\u753b exemplifies governance constructed as immune system.<\/p>\n

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

The Youth IGF practically raises the philosophical problematic of intergenerational justice.<\/p>\n

Governance as immune system<\/h2>\n

Peter Sloterdijk's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2019 conference. We examine that application below.<\/p>\n

1. Application to "\u82e5\u8005\u53c2\u753b"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u82e5\u8005\u53c2\u753b" can be positioned, from the perspective of Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology<\/strong>, as a central problematic. In Germany's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u82e5\u8005\u53c2\u753b are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

2. Application to "\u30d7\u30e9\u30a4\u30d0\u30b7\u30fc"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30d7\u30e9\u30a4\u30d0\u30b7\u30fc" can be positioned, from the perspective of Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology<\/strong>, as a derivative problematic. In Germany's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30d7\u30e9\u30a4\u30d0\u30b7\u30fc are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

3. Application to "SNS"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "SNS" can be positioned, from the perspective of Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Germany's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around SNS are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

4. Application to "\u82e5\u8005\u80b2\u6210"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u82e5\u8005\u80b2\u6210" can be positioned, from the perspective of Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Germany's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u82e5\u8005\u80b2\u6210 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

5. Application to "\u30e1\u30f3\u30bf\u30eb\u30d8\u30eb\u30b9"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30e1\u30f3\u30bf\u30eb\u30d8\u30eb\u30b9" can be positioned, from the perspective of Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Germany's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30e1\u30f3\u30bf\u30eb\u30d8\u30eb\u30b9 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 Peter Sloterdijk perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Germany.<\/p>\n

First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology<\/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 Peter Sloterdijk's framework to other IGF conferences<\/li>\n
  2. Comparative contrast between Contemporary German Philosophy<\/strong> and other theoretical traditions<\/li>\n
  3. Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Germany<\/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