Book contents
- The Non-coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights
- The Non-coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I The Contextual Challenges and Purpose of the Non-coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights
- Part II Reflections on Some Theories and Doctrines
- 6 The Doctrine of the Sameness of Rights Online and Offline
- 7 Claims of New Internet-Specific Human Rights
- 8 The Capabilities Approach
- 9 The Frankfurt School and the Normative Order of the Internet
- 10 The Articulation and Critical Review of Self-Normativity
- 11 The Transversality Principle (Teubner)
- 12 Network Society Approach (Castells)
- Part III The Core Elements of Non-coherence Theory
- Part IV The Impact of the Non-coherence Theory
- Part V Internet Balancing Formula
- In Lieu of the Concluding Remarks
- Index
9 - The Frankfurt School and the Normative Order of the Internet
from Part II - Reflections on Some Theories and Doctrines
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 February 2024
- The Non-coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights
- The Non-coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I The Contextual Challenges and Purpose of the Non-coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights
- Part II Reflections on Some Theories and Doctrines
- 6 The Doctrine of the Sameness of Rights Online and Offline
- 7 Claims of New Internet-Specific Human Rights
- 8 The Capabilities Approach
- 9 The Frankfurt School and the Normative Order of the Internet
- 10 The Articulation and Critical Review of Self-Normativity
- 11 The Transversality Principle (Teubner)
- 12 Network Society Approach (Castells)
- Part III The Core Elements of Non-coherence Theory
- Part IV The Impact of the Non-coherence Theory
- Part V Internet Balancing Formula
- In Lieu of the Concluding Remarks
- Index
Summary
The question of legitimation, according to the analysis of the Frankfurt scholars, contains an unanswered aspect pertaining to the entire normative approach. This is about the final arbiter to decide whether a regulatory system can claim legitimacy. It can be logically suggested that such a final arbiter needs to be positioned outside of the normative system in question. Once we can agree that the natality aspect of fundamental rights is lost in the transfer from the non-digital domain, we see that the Frankfurt school’s aspiration towards the general explanatory power is lost as well. The relational chain stops after the creation of the digital narrative; that is, normativity does not follow as a logical result from internal development inside the digital domain. Despite the relational chain being broken, normativity exists in and for the digital domain. If not a result of the development as proposed by the Frankfurt school, there have to be other explanatory venues. The main among these is the concept of self-normativity.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Non-Coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights , pp. 101 - 107Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024