Article/Publication Details
Views: 666

THE AGE OF THE SYSTEMIC IMPERATIVE. A PHENOMENOLOGICAL DIAGNOSIS OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

Abstract
We provide a phenomenological interpretation of the rise of responsibility as a key concept of contemporary ethics. If we consider the philosophical tradition at large, responsibility has emerged as a concern, or even the center of attention, of ethical reflection only in relatively recent times. How can we account for this emergence? We argue that today’s pervasive concern with responsibility envisages a responsibility that is constitutively “social,” and that the thus understood responsibility traces back to a more original trait of sense, which presently informs our relation to the world. This trait we call “responsive.” Hence, our contention is that, when in contemporary ethical discourse we speak of (social) responsibility, the latter has a fundamentally responsive character. The responsive character of the contemporary concept of responsibility is related to the appearance of a new kind of imperative, which we call “systemic.” Originating from the unique imperative of “the system of universal existence,” systemic imperatives have the form of factual urgencies, which, while demanding an urgent and effective response, exclude the scope of what traditional ethics conceives as the perfectibility of beings. Our diagnosis of responsive responsibility in the horizon of the systemic imperative is guided by the phenomenon of “original responsibility”, which we obtain from Heidegger’s hermeneutic phenomenology. “Original responsibility” refers to the relation between man’s being and being itself. The form of this relation is that man’s being consists in a (needed) response to being itself. Based on this hermeneutic framework, we show how the kind of threat which informs the systemic imperative (here exemplified by Hans Jonas’s “ecological imperative”) holds in store the expectability of a new “perfection” of beings.

Keywords
social responsibility, responsive ethics, perfection, systemic imperative, categorical imperative, hermeneutic phenomenology, Hans Jonas, Martin Heidegger.

References

• Arendt, H. (1987). Collective Responsibility. In W. Bernauer (Ed.), Amor mundi (43–50). Wiesbaden: Springer.
• Banzhaf, G. (2002). Philosophie der Verantwortung. Entwürfe, Entwicklugen, Perspektiven. Heidelberg: Winter.
• Bayertz, K., & Beck, B. (2017). Der Begriff Verantwortung in der Moderne. 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. In L. Heidbrinck, C. Langbehn & J. Loh (Eds.), Handbuch Verantwortung (133–147). Wiesbaden: Springer.
• Christen, M. (2011). Nachhaltigkeit als ethische Herausforderung. Der Greifswalder Ansatz von Konrad Ott und Ralf Döring. Information Philosophie, 2, 34–43.
• De Gennaro, I. (2013). The Weirdness of Being. Heidegger’s Unheard Anwser to the Seinsfrage. London and New York: Routledge.
• De Gennaro, I., & Zaccaria, G. (2011). The Dictatorship of Value. Teaching and Research in the Planetary University. Milano: McGraw-Hill.
• De Gennaro, I., & Zaccaria, G. (2016). Dies ultimus. Per una diagnosi del male nell’anamnesi dell’essere. Eudia, 10, 1–17.
• De Gennaro, I., & Lüfter, R. (2018). La perfezione tra passato e futuro. Per una diagnosi della responsabilità sociale. In F. Miano (Ed.), Etica e responsabilità (145–156). Napoli-Salerno: Orthotes.
• Dovolich, C. (2003). Etica come responsabilità. Prospettive a confronto. Milano: Mimesis.
• Esposito, E. (2011). The Future of the Futures. The Time of Money in Financing and Society. Cheltenham-Northhampton: Edward Elgar.
• Feinberg, J. (1970). Doing and Deserving. Essays in the Theory of Responsibility. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Fingarette, H. (1967). On Responsibility. New York: Basic Books.
• Giovanola, B. (2012). Oltre l’homo oeconomicus. Lineamenti di etica economica. Salerno: Orthotes.
• Hahn, H. (2017). Globale Verantwortung. In L. Heidbrinck, C. Langbehn & J. Loh (Eds.), Handbuch Verantwortung (525–543). Wiesbaden: Springer.
• Heidbrinck, L. (2017). Definition und Voraussetzung der Verantwortung. In L. Heidbrinck, C. Langbehn & J. Loh (Eds.), Handbuch Verantwortung (3–33). Wiesbaden: Springer.
• Heidbrinck, L., Langbehn C., & Loh, J. (Eds.). (2017). Handbuch Verantwortung. Wiesbaden: Springer.
• Heidegger, M. (1989). Beiträge zur Philosophie (Vom Ereignis) (GA 65). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1997). Besinnung (GA 66). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1998). Die Geschichte des Seyns (GA 67). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2005). Bremer und Freiburger Vorträge (GA 79). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Jonas, H. (2003). Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
• Jonas, H. (2010). The Imperative of Responsibility. In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
• Kant, I. (1887). General Introduction to the Metaphysic of Morals. In W. Hastie (Ed.), The Philosophy of Law. An exposition of the Fundamental Principles of Jurisprudence as the Science of Right. Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark. Retreived from https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hastie-the-philosophy-of-law.
• Kane, R. (Ed.). (2002). The Oxford Handbook of Free Will. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Lazzarini, G. (2007). Etica e scenari di responsabilità sociale. Roma: Franco Angeli.
• Loh, J. (2017). Relata der Verantwortung. In L. Heidbrinck, C. Langbehn & J. Loh (Eds.), Handbuch Verantwortung (39–56). Wiesbaden: Springer.
• Lüfter, R. (2021). The Ethics of Economic Responsibility. London: Routledge.
• Lüfter, R. (2023). Ethik der Gegenwart. Essais. Nordhausen: Bautz.
• McKeon, R. (1957). The Development and Significance of the Concept of Responsibility. Revue Internationale De Philosophie, 6 (39), 3–32.
• Miano, F. (2009). Responsabilità. Napoli: Guida.
• Miano, F. (2014). Legami di vita buona. Educare alla coresponsabilità. Roma: Ave.
• Miller, D. (2012). National Responsibility and Global Justice. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Oxford English Dictionary. (2024). Threat. Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://www.oed.com/dictionary/threat_n?tab=factsheet#18636413.
• Pogge, T. (2002). World Poverty and Human Rights. Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms. Cambridge: Policy Press.
• Responsive Web Design. (2023, November 18). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design.
• Schlink, B. (2010). Die Zukunft der Verantwortung. Merkur. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Europäisches Denken, 738 (64), 1047–1058.
• Singer, P. (2007). Hunger, Wohlstand und Moral. In B. Bleisch (Ed.), Weltarmut und Ethik (27–52). Paderborn: Mentis.
• van de Poel, I. (2001). The Relation Between Forward-Looking and Backward-Looking Responsibility. In N. A. Vincent & I. van de Poel (Eds.), Moral Responsibility. Byond Free Will and Determinism (37–52). Dodrecht et al.: Springer.
• Waller, B. (2011). Against Moral Responsibility. Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Weber, M. (2002). Politik als Beruf. Berlin: Contumax.
• Werner, M. H. (2006). Verantwortung. In M. Düwell, C. Hübenthal & M. H. Werner (Eds.), Handbuch Ethik (541–548). Stuttgart: Metzler.
• Young, I. M. (2011). Responsibility for Justice. New York: Oxford University Press.