Corona is on everyone’s lips – as a danger, an uncertainty factor, as something that threatens our lives. Government actions are mostly based on numbers like incidence and public sentiment. It is primarily heard by virologists and epidemiologists. Every once in a while philosophers have had their say, but their contributions often lacked a structured approach.
The Society for Analytic Philosophy Competition
In Time Book »Think about Corona. Philosophical Essays on the Epidemic and Its Consequences ”, edited by Berlin philosopher Geert Kiel, president of the Society for Analytical Philosophy (GAP), and Romy Gaster, managing director of the GAP. The work is based on a competition of the same name announced by GAP in May 2020. By the closing date of August 31, 2020, more than 100 articles had been received, reviewed and evaluated by an international jury. The resulting volume contains articles by the three award-winning winners: Christian Bodnick (Zurich), Louise K. Muller (Dresden) and Emmanuel Veban (Berlin), as well as six other non-award-winning texts. Unfortunately, in the introduction, the editors failed to confirm the criteria the jury used to award entries.
The set of topics required in the competition ranged from balancing goods between health, freedom and prosperity, justifying state interference in basic rights, issues of medical ethics, solidarity, the role of scientific expertise in politics and society, false news and conspiracy. Theories, scientific communication, economics, and distribution issues.
In fact, “thinking” in the literal sense is a feature of philosophy. On the topic, one thinks about what happened and does not provide ready-made answers; Rather, one asks questions about what is happening. The special strength of analytic philosophy is the careful investigation of concepts, patterns, actions, and ideas associated with them. Analytic philosophy is not lost in the dark woods, but it identifies questions and thus provides an essential framework for further reflection.
In his article “Trust as a Political Category in Times of Coronavirus”, Christian Bodnick examines: We encounter trust as a factor of personal bonding, especially in “intimate relationships such as friendships, love and family relationships.” However, we also find it in politics, with experts and in relation to other actors. Anyone who loses confidence in those who behave in public develops into distrust, which in turn can lead to transgressions. So Bodnik calls for “reliability” rather than the moral currency of trust. For him, this is not just a “conceptual trick”: “Those who depend on something make an assumption about the future that may or may not be fulfilled. If not, then he has no reason to be disappointed or indignant in any relevant moral sense – unlike a person. Whose trust has been abused
While Louis K. Mueller in “The Samaritan Principle. Emmanuel Veban explains why the state allows force in a state of emergency” whose “intervention in self-government” is justifiably supported (as long as it “helps us fulfill our individual moral duty, to save others from extreme hardship”), as Emmanuel Veban explains “Praise the guesswork.” He understands linguistic speech as verbs, and propositions are “representational speech verbs” that aim at truth: “In a situation of uncertainty, the choice of the form of speech action can provide evidence of credibility and reliability.”