In den 47 Mitgliedsstaaten der EMRK sind verschiedene religiöse Lehren verbreitet, denen jeweils ... more In den 47 Mitgliedsstaaten der EMRK sind verschiedene religiöse Lehren verbreitet, denen jeweils unterschiedliche Stellenwerte beigemessen werden. Nach Rechtsprechung des EGMR können bei religiöse Lehren herabwürdigenden Äußerungen legitime Ziele vorliegen, die staatliche Eingriffe in Art. 10 Abs. 1 EMRK in einer demokratischen Gesellschaft notwendig machen. Die vom EGMR anerkannten Eingriffsziele sowie die in den Abwägungsentscheidungen herangezogenen Kriterien werden im Folgenden analysiert. Problematische Aspekte wie der Rechtsbegriff der religiösen Gefühle und Inkonsistenzen bei den Abwägungsentscheidungen werden dabei unter Berücksichtigung der Rezeption in der Rechtswissenschaft hervorgehoben. Anschließend wird anhand einer chronologischen Betrachtung der Ab-wägungsentscheidungen des Gerichtshofs dargelegt, dass die Dogmatik des EGMR sich in den letzten Jahrzehnten gewandelt hat, sodass aktuell von einem stärkeren Schutz vor Herabwürdigung religiöser Lehren unter Schwächung der Meinungsfreiheit gesprochen werden kann.
This paper tries to answer whether or not Jewish though is compatible with Western thought, which... more This paper tries to answer whether or not Jewish though is compatible with Western thought, which plays out in the question whether the Western style liberal democratic concept of a state can provide a fitting system for the Jewish people. After shortly reflecting on the question what the constituting element of the Jewish people is and how this can justify the use of the term “Jewish thought”, the philosophical groundings of the Western post-Enlightenment concept of the liberal democratic state shall be examined. It is then the objective to have a closer look at the text “The meaning of homeland” by A.B. Yehoshua that caused the Yehoshua debate in 2006. By analyzing the different possibilities for Jewish life in the land of Israel and in the Diaspora as pointed out by A.B. Yehoshua as well as the history of the foundation of the Jewish state, it will be explained why Israel already is in many ways different to the prototype Western state. By further analyzing the text “Israeli Judaism: The Judaism of Survival no longer works” by Yair Caspi, which is a critic on Yehoshua’s text, the ontological differences between the Western concept of the sovereign nation state and the understanding of Israel in Jewish thought shall be pointed out. With the help of Heidegger’s analysis of the inauthentic “I” in the Western enlightened thought, the fundamental difference between Western thought and Jewish thought will be outlined with special respect to the yearning for authenticity that can be found in Western societies and that at the same time is a philosophical grounding for Nazism. With the ontological assumption of this fundamental difference, it will be argued why however, on a political level the existence of a sovereign nation state is an absolute necessity for the Jewish people in current times and why at the same time the effects of this concept of a state are less dangerous in Israel than in any other place on earth.
In den 47 Mitgliedsstaaten der EMRK sind verschiedene religiöse Lehren verbreitet, denen jeweils ... more In den 47 Mitgliedsstaaten der EMRK sind verschiedene religiöse Lehren verbreitet, denen jeweils unterschiedliche Stellenwerte beigemessen werden. Nach Rechtsprechung des EGMR können bei religiöse Lehren herabwürdigenden Äußerungen legitime Ziele vorliegen, die staatliche Eingriffe in Art. 10 Abs. 1 EMRK in einer demokratischen Gesellschaft notwendig machen. Die vom EGMR anerkannten Eingriffsziele sowie die in den Abwägungsentscheidungen herangezogenen Kriterien werden im Folgenden analysiert. Problematische Aspekte wie der Rechtsbegriff der religiösen Gefühle und Inkonsistenzen bei den Abwägungsentscheidungen werden dabei unter Berücksichtigung der Rezeption in der Rechtswissenschaft hervorgehoben. Anschließend wird anhand einer chronologischen Betrachtung der Ab-wägungsentscheidungen des Gerichtshofs dargelegt, dass die Dogmatik des EGMR sich in den letzten Jahrzehnten gewandelt hat, sodass aktuell von einem stärkeren Schutz vor Herabwürdigung religiöser Lehren unter Schwächung der Meinungsfreiheit gesprochen werden kann.
This paper tries to answer whether or not Jewish though is compatible with Western thought, which... more This paper tries to answer whether or not Jewish though is compatible with Western thought, which plays out in the question whether the Western style liberal democratic concept of a state can provide a fitting system for the Jewish people. After shortly reflecting on the question what the constituting element of the Jewish people is and how this can justify the use of the term “Jewish thought”, the philosophical groundings of the Western post-Enlightenment concept of the liberal democratic state shall be examined. It is then the objective to have a closer look at the text “The meaning of homeland” by A.B. Yehoshua that caused the Yehoshua debate in 2006. By analyzing the different possibilities for Jewish life in the land of Israel and in the Diaspora as pointed out by A.B. Yehoshua as well as the history of the foundation of the Jewish state, it will be explained why Israel already is in many ways different to the prototype Western state. By further analyzing the text “Israeli Judaism: The Judaism of Survival no longer works” by Yair Caspi, which is a critic on Yehoshua’s text, the ontological differences between the Western concept of the sovereign nation state and the understanding of Israel in Jewish thought shall be pointed out. With the help of Heidegger’s analysis of the inauthentic “I” in the Western enlightened thought, the fundamental difference between Western thought and Jewish thought will be outlined with special respect to the yearning for authenticity that can be found in Western societies and that at the same time is a philosophical grounding for Nazism. With the ontological assumption of this fundamental difference, it will be argued why however, on a political level the existence of a sovereign nation state is an absolute necessity for the Jewish people in current times and why at the same time the effects of this concept of a state are less dangerous in Israel than in any other place on earth.
Uploads
Papers by Lukas Claes
Anschließend wird anhand einer chronologischen Betrachtung der Ab-wägungsentscheidungen des Gerichtshofs dargelegt, dass die Dogmatik des EGMR sich in den letzten Jahrzehnten gewandelt hat, sodass aktuell von einem stärkeren Schutz vor Herabwürdigung religiöser Lehren unter Schwächung der Meinungsfreiheit gesprochen werden kann.
By further analyzing the text “Israeli Judaism: The Judaism of Survival no longer works” by Yair Caspi, which is a critic on Yehoshua’s text, the ontological differences between the Western concept of the sovereign nation state and the understanding of Israel in Jewish thought shall be pointed out. With the help of Heidegger’s analysis of the inauthentic “I” in the Western enlightened thought, the fundamental difference between Western thought and Jewish thought will be outlined with special respect to the yearning for authenticity that can be found in Western societies and that at the same time is a philosophical grounding for Nazism.
With the ontological assumption of this fundamental difference, it will be argued why however, on a political level the existence of a sovereign nation state is an absolute necessity for the Jewish people in current times and why at the same time the effects of this concept of a state are less dangerous in Israel than in any other place on earth.
Anschließend wird anhand einer chronologischen Betrachtung der Ab-wägungsentscheidungen des Gerichtshofs dargelegt, dass die Dogmatik des EGMR sich in den letzten Jahrzehnten gewandelt hat, sodass aktuell von einem stärkeren Schutz vor Herabwürdigung religiöser Lehren unter Schwächung der Meinungsfreiheit gesprochen werden kann.
By further analyzing the text “Israeli Judaism: The Judaism of Survival no longer works” by Yair Caspi, which is a critic on Yehoshua’s text, the ontological differences between the Western concept of the sovereign nation state and the understanding of Israel in Jewish thought shall be pointed out. With the help of Heidegger’s analysis of the inauthentic “I” in the Western enlightened thought, the fundamental difference between Western thought and Jewish thought will be outlined with special respect to the yearning for authenticity that can be found in Western societies and that at the same time is a philosophical grounding for Nazism.
With the ontological assumption of this fundamental difference, it will be argued why however, on a political level the existence of a sovereign nation state is an absolute necessity for the Jewish people in current times and why at the same time the effects of this concept of a state are less dangerous in Israel than in any other place on earth.