{"id":8755,"date":"2016-07-08T04:00:00","date_gmt":"2016-07-07T19:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2016\/07\/08\/en-philo-usa-igf-2016-heidegger-technology\/"},"modified":"2016-07-08T04:00:00","modified_gmt":"2016-07-07T19:00:00","slug":"en-philo-usa-igf-2016-heidegger-technology","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2016\/07\/08\/en-philo-usa-igf-2016-heidegger-technology\/","title":{"rendered":"Heideggerian Technology on USA IGF 2016 Washington D.C. \u2014 Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

\n

This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Ontology \/ Phenomenology<\/strong> \u2014 most prominently associated with Martin Heidegger<\/strong> \u2014 to re-read the USA IGF 2016 Washington D.C. conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Introduction: The Problem<\/h2>\n

Heidegger's concept of Ge-stell (enframing) in "The Question Concerning Technology" captures how modern technology reveals the world as "standing-reserve." The themes of USA IGF 2016 directly engage the question of controlling this enframing.<\/p>\n

This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of USA IGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve<\/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

The internet as enframing<\/h2>\n

Topics like \u5927\u7d71\u9818\u9078\u6319\u3068\u30cd\u30c3\u30c8 risk treating both humans and nature as data standing-reserve. Read Heideggerianly, whether the traditional modes of world-disclosure in USA contain a "saving power" that can counter this enframing becomes the central question.<\/p>\n

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

The national-level IGF (USA IGF) is an attempt to redefine the modern category of the nation-state in the digital era.<\/p>\n

The saving power<\/h2>\n

Martin Heidegger's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2016 conference. We examine that application below.<\/p>\n

1. Application to "\u5927\u7d71\u9818\u9078\u6319\u3068\u30cd\u30c3\u30c8"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u5927\u7d71\u9818\u9078\u6319\u3068\u30cd\u30c3\u30c8" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve<\/strong>, as a central problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u5927\u7d71\u9818\u9078\u6319\u3068\u30cd\u30c3\u30c8 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

2. Application to "\u507d\u60c5\u5831"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u507d\u60c5\u5831" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve<\/strong>, as a derivative problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u507d\u60c5\u5831 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

3. Application to "\u30d7\u30e9\u30c3\u30c8\u30d5\u30a9\u30fc\u30e0\u8cac\u4efb"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30d7\u30e9\u30c3\u30c8\u30d5\u30a9\u30fc\u30e0\u8cac\u4efb" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30d7\u30e9\u30c3\u30c8\u30d5\u30a9\u30fc\u30e0\u8cac\u4efb are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

4. Application to "\u56fd\u5185\u6cd5\u6574\u5099"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u56fd\u5185\u6cd5\u6574\u5099" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u56fd\u5185\u6cd5\u6574\u5099 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

5. Application to "\u653f\u5e9c\uff0b\u6c11\u9593\u5354\u50cd"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u653f\u5e9c\uff0b\u6c11\u9593\u5354\u50cd" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u653f\u5e9c\uff0b\u6c11\u9593\u5354\u50cd 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 Martin Heidegger perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in USA.<\/p>\n

First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve<\/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 Martin Heidegger's framework to other IGF conferences<\/li>\n
  2. Comparative contrast between Ontology \/ Phenomenology<\/strong> and other theoretical traditions<\/li>\n
  3. Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of USA<\/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