{"id":14021,"date":"2024-05-17T20:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-05-17T11:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2024\/05\/17\/en-philo-seedig-2024-online-arendt-vita-activa\/"},"modified":"2024-05-17T20:00:00","modified_gmt":"2024-05-17T11:00:00","slug":"en-philo-seedig-2024-online-arendt-vita-activa","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2024\/05\/17\/en-philo-seedig-2024-online-arendt-vita-activa\/","title":{"rendered":"Arendtian Action on SEEDIG 2024 Hybrid \u2014 Labor \/ work \/ action and the public realm"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

\n

This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Political Philosophy \/ Phenomenology<\/strong> \u2014 most prominently associated with Hannah Arendt<\/strong> \u2014 to re-read the SEEDIG 2024 Hybrid conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Introduction: The Problem<\/h2>\n

Arendt's concept of "action" in The Human Condition demands a public space where plural humans appear to one another through word and deed. SEEDIG can be read as a rare implementation of this "space of appearance" in the digital age.<\/p>\n

This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of SEEDIG becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Labor \/ work \/ action and the public realm<\/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

IGF as a space of appearance<\/h2>\n

Utterances at Hybrid are not only instruments for solving technical problems but acts in which participants disclose "who they are". This resists the reduction of society to mere "labor" and "work" that Arendt warned against \u2014 particularly resonant in Hybrid's context as a response to the shrinking of the political realm.<\/p>\n

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

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

Plurality and natality in politics<\/h2>\n

Hannah Arendt's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2024 conference. We examine that application below.<\/p>\n

1. Application to "AI\u5b9f\u88c5"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "AI\u5b9f\u88c5" can be positioned, from the perspective of Hannah Arendt's Labor \/ work \/ action and the public realm<\/strong>, as a central problematic. In Hybrid's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around AI\u5b9f\u88c5 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

2. Application to "\u60c5\u5831\u306e\u5b8c\u5168\u6027"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u60c5\u5831\u306e\u5b8c\u5168\u6027" can be positioned, from the perspective of Hannah Arendt's Labor \/ work \/ action and the public realm<\/strong>, as a derivative problematic. In Hybrid's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u60c5\u5831\u306e\u5b8c\u5168\u6027 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

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

Discussion of "\u5730\u57df\u5354\u8abf" can be positioned, from the perspective of Hannah Arendt's Labor \/ work \/ action and the public realm<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Hybrid's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u5730\u57df\u5354\u8abf are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

4. Application to "\u8d8a\u5883\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u8d8a\u5883\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf" can be positioned, from the perspective of Hannah Arendt's Labor \/ work \/ action and the public realm<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Hybrid's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u8d8a\u5883\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

5. Application to "\u751f\u6210AI"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u751f\u6210AI" can be positioned, from the perspective of Hannah Arendt's Labor \/ work \/ action and the public realm<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Hybrid's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u751f\u6210AI 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 Hannah Arendt perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Hybrid.<\/p>\n

First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Labor \/ work \/ action and the public realm<\/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 Hannah Arendt's framework to other IGF conferences<\/li>\n
  2. Comparative contrast between Political Philosophy \/ Phenomenology<\/strong> and other theoretical traditions<\/li>\n
  3. Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Hybrid<\/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