Od 'sumne sreče' h kultiviranemu razglabljanju

Bentham in Kant o načelih javnega komuniciranja

Abstract

Analiza Kantove in Benthamove konceptualizacije načela publicitete razkriva temeljno razliko med v sodobnosti prevladujočo idejo svobode tiska, ki izhaja iz Benthamove "sumne sreče", ter Kantovo zahtevo po javni rabi uma in njegovim načelom publicitete. Bentham je v interesu splošne sreče zagovarjal svoboden tisk kot sredstvo javnega nadzora parlamenta. Kant je zagovarjal svobodno javno razpravo kot instrument razvoja in izražanja človekove avtonomne racionalnosti. Toda "svoboden tisk", ki je utelešen v lastninski pravici njegovih lastnikov, ne more doseči ne Benthamovih ne Kantovih ciljev, ki v ospredje postavljajo osebnostno pravico komuniciranja, ne pa korporacijsko pravico svobode tiska. V demokratičnih družbah, v katerih državljani, ne pa posamezni stanovi, legitimirajo oblast, bi moralo nadzorstveno razsežnost publicitete, ki se izraža v korporacijski svobodi tiska, učinkovito dopolniti delovanje v smeri izenačevanja državljanov v javni rabi uma.

Keywords

Bentham;Jeremmy;Kant;Immanuel;Komuniciranje;Javna sfera;Nadzor;Pravičnost;Svoboda tiska;Politične pravice;Lastništvo;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2003
Typology:	1.01 - Original Scientific Article
Organization:	UL FDV - Faculty of Social Sciences
UDC:	659.3
COBISS:	22690397
ISSN:	0040-3598
Parent publication:	Teorija in praksa
Views:	714
Downloads:	261
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary abstract:	An analysis of Immanuel Kant's and Jeremy Bentham's conceptualisations of the principle of publicity reveals a fundamental difference between the currently prevailing notion of freedom of the press as the fourth estate derived from Bentham's model of "distrustful surveillance" and the Kantian quest for the public use of reason and his principle of publicity. Bentham favoured a free press as an instrument for public control of government, in the interest of the general happiness. Kant favoured free public discussion as an instrument for the development and expression of human autonomous rationality. Yet a "free press" embodied in the property rights of the owners of the press may well fail to achieve either Benthamite or Kantian goals, which lead to a personal right to communicate rather than to a corporate right to press freedom. In democratic societies where citizens rather than different estates legitimise all powers, the control dimension of publicity embodied in the corporate freedom of the press should be effectively supplemented by actions toward equalizing private citizens in their public use of reason.
Secondary keywords:	Communication;Public sphere;Supervision;Justice;Freedom of the press;Political rights;Ownership;
Type (COBISS):	Not categorized
Pages:	str. 985-1011
Volume:	ǂLet. ǂ40
Issue:	ǂšt. ǂ6
Chronology:	nov./dec. 2003
Keywords (UDC):	applied sciences;medicine;technology;uporabne znanosti;medicina;tehnika;communication and transport industries;accountancy;business management;public relations;komunikacije in transport;knjigovodstvo;poslovni menedžment;stiki z javnostjo;publicity;information work;public relations;stiki z javnostjo;reklama;mass communication;informing;enlightening of the public at large;množično komuniciranje;obveščanje najširše javnosti;
ID:	1467553