Seiteninhalt Hauptmenü Portalmenu Seitenmenü Schriftgröße ändern Breadcrump Index Suche
web177_PHILO

Sie sind hier:

Seite drucken

Schriftgröße ändern

Seiteninhalt


 
Alice Pechriggl ist Mitglied des Forschungsnetzwerks

Social Imaginary and Creation

„Social Imaginary and Creation“ ist ein internationales und interdisziplinäres Forschungsnetzwerk an der Schnittstelle zwischen Kulturwissenschaften und Künsten. Das Netzwerk organisiert jährlich eine Arbeitstagung rund um das Denken von Cornelius Castoriadis. Es umfasst die Association Castoriadis (Paris), das IMEC (Caen, Paris), die Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt, die Columbia University New-York, die Université d’Ottawa, die Université Paris 7-Diderot, die University Södertörn of Stockholm und die Université Saint-Louis-Bruxelles.

Die erste internationale Tagung fand vom 6. Bis zum 8. Juni 2013 zum Thema Imaginäres der Stadt (l’imaginaire de la ville) am IMEC in Caen und Paris statt.

Programm: http://www.castoriadis.org/fr/default.asp



Martin Weiß ist Mitglied des Forschungsnetzwerks

COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) Action Bio-objects and their boundaries: governing matters at the intersection of society, politics, and science

Europe seeks to become the most dynamic knowledge-based economy of the globe, and the production and circulation of “bio-objects”, such as stem cells, chimera, tissue samples or genetically modified organisms, play a key part in this endeavour. This Action develops novel interdisciplinary tools based on a range of evidence that will improve our understanding of “bio-objects”, their production and governance. The core questions answered through this COST Action are: how are the boundaries between human and animal, organic and non-organic, living and the non-living opened up?; how do bio-objects change social relations?; how does the public-private interface shape the making of bio-objects?; and finally, how does the governance of bio-objects perform at different levels, from the level of the European Union and its Member States to the sub-political level, and finally in clinics and laboratories?

Website: http://www.univie.ac.at/bio-objects/index.htm



Martin Weiß ist Mitglied des Forschungsnetzwerks

European Network for the Social Studies of Forensics

In the past 20 years forensic DNA has proved its merits as a powerful technology in criminal justice systems. Meanwhile this technology has evolved and diversified in various ways. Next to innovations that have made it possible to produce trustworthy DNA profiles based on little amount of biological material, forensic DNA has also changed from being solely a tool of identification into an investigative tool. This latter implies that DNA research is not only conducted to establish a link between a biological trace and a known suspect, but also to provide leads about an unknown suspect. Databases-searches, familial searching, DNA-phenotyping are such more or less novel approaches.
This development in technology has also affected the governance of forensic DNA across different countries in Europe. Although there seems to be a ‘logic of convergence’ towards a homogenization of legal arrangements at play within Europe, there are still major differences in legislation. For example whereas the Netherlands has enacted a law regulating the use of DNA-phenotyping, in many other European countries this use is illegal. In addition, the specific division of labor and of ‘jurisdiction’ among the different actors involved in the criminal investigation and the legal process differs as well.$0 $0What are the differences and similarities between European countries in governance and practice of forensic DNA? Do these differences generate different kinds of normative and moral problems and questions? And what are these? Are the different systems across Europe in a flux? And if so, in which directions are they moving? How do legal, political concerns relate to developments in technology? How does the future of forensic genetics and its use in the criminal justice systems look alike? What can we learn from other fields of expertise, such as craniofacial reconstruction? Is there a conversion going on between the different fields in forensics? How can a network of social science scholars afford a better grasp of the trends in forensics in Europe as to anticipate relevant/important sociopolitical and scholarly questions.

Website: https://sites.google.com/site/eunetssf

 
 
 
© 2009 Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt | Impressum | Kontakt | Disclaimer

Sprachauswahl