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
6 - The Doctrine of the Sameness of Rights Online and Offline
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 idea that human rights offline and online are the same belongs to the sphere of human rights religious reasoning. As such, it is the representation of faith located far and above the reach of explicative justification. Religious justifications as a rule remain immune to any contrary argumentation. The correctness of the sameness statement seems to remain unquestioned from its appearance. The doubt about generality allows us to say that the statement of the sameness of human rights in the digital and non-digital domains is true at the highest level of generality and abstractness. Here human rights in these domains are coherent, and non-coherence becomes more and more apparent in the image of digital human rights as we progress towards increasing concreteness. At some point non-coherence disappears when human rights specific to the digital domain emerge which are not a reflection of a comparable right off-line.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Non-Coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights , pp. 73 - 79Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024