Supplement III: Positioning the Wittenberg Framework Within the Contemporary Research Landscape
Fuente:
Zenodo
Enregistré dans:
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Langue: | anglais |
| Publié: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866901618559025152 |
|---|---|
| author | Wittenberg, Ingo |
| author_facet | Wittenberg, Ingo |
| contents | <p><strong>Reader’s note: New readers are encouraged to begin with <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17845771">Part 0</a> , Chapter 4 (“Architecture of the Series and Reader Orientation ”), which provides a brief overview and orientation to the Framework. Links to Preprints are listed in <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17845771">Part 0</a>, Chapter 5 (“Publication and Citation Record”)</strong></p> <p>This Supplement positions the <strong>Wittenberg Framework</strong> within the contemporary scholarly landscape of AI governance, cross-cultural ethics, normative theory, and geometric modelling. Rather than providing a conventional literature review, it maps the intellectual lineage, parallel research streams, and conceptual neighbourhoods relevant to the Framework.</p> <p>The analysis clarifies how the Framework relates to established traditions—such as Augustinian moral orientation, Confucian role ethics, and European procedural–legal rationality—while remaining distinct from them. It demonstrates that these traditions function as <strong>interpretive anchors</strong>, not as defining sources of the analytical axes.</p> <p>A central contribution of the Supplement is the explicit clarification that the Framework’s axial architecture is <strong>non-exhaustive, non-essentialist, and configurable</strong>. The four axes employed represent an analytically sufficient instantiation for comparative purposes, but they are neither numerically fixed nor ontologically closed. Depending on the research context, fewer, additional, or differently specified axes may be employed without altering the core methodology.</p> <p>The Supplement further situates the Framework in relation to contemporary philosophical debates (e.g., value pluralism, incomparability, and normative plurality), adjacent governance and AI ethics research, and existing geometric or axis-based models. It identifies points of proximity without claiming precedence and articulates where the Framework introduces genuine methodological novelty.</p> <p>Overall, this document supports advanced academic use of the Wittenberg Framework by providing conceptual orientation, discursive positioning, and methodological clarification. It is intended as an interpretive and navigational resource for researchers across philosophy, governance studies, policy analysis, and interdisciplinary AI research.</p> <p><strong>Version 1 (2026-02-02): </strong>Initial Version</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_18461074 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | eng |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Supplement III: Positioning the Wittenberg Framework Within the Contemporary Research Landscape Wittenberg, Ingo Wittenberg Framework Comparative Meta-Governance AI Governance Cross-Cultural Ethics Normative Pluralism Moral Order Relational Ethics Regulatory Orientation Meta-Contextual Complexity Geometric Modelling Normative Architecture Comparative Philosophy <p><strong>Reader’s note: New readers are encouraged to begin with <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17845771">Part 0</a> , Chapter 4 (“Architecture of the Series and Reader Orientation ”), which provides a brief overview and orientation to the Framework. Links to Preprints are listed in <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17845771">Part 0</a>, Chapter 5 (“Publication and Citation Record”)</strong></p> <p>This Supplement positions the <strong>Wittenberg Framework</strong> within the contemporary scholarly landscape of AI governance, cross-cultural ethics, normative theory, and geometric modelling. Rather than providing a conventional literature review, it maps the intellectual lineage, parallel research streams, and conceptual neighbourhoods relevant to the Framework.</p> <p>The analysis clarifies how the Framework relates to established traditions—such as Augustinian moral orientation, Confucian role ethics, and European procedural–legal rationality—while remaining distinct from them. It demonstrates that these traditions function as <strong>interpretive anchors</strong>, not as defining sources of the analytical axes.</p> <p>A central contribution of the Supplement is the explicit clarification that the Framework’s axial architecture is <strong>non-exhaustive, non-essentialist, and configurable</strong>. The four axes employed represent an analytically sufficient instantiation for comparative purposes, but they are neither numerically fixed nor ontologically closed. Depending on the research context, fewer, additional, or differently specified axes may be employed without altering the core methodology.</p> <p>The Supplement further situates the Framework in relation to contemporary philosophical debates (e.g., value pluralism, incomparability, and normative plurality), adjacent governance and AI ethics research, and existing geometric or axis-based models. It identifies points of proximity without claiming precedence and articulates where the Framework introduces genuine methodological novelty.</p> <p>Overall, this document supports advanced academic use of the Wittenberg Framework by providing conceptual orientation, discursive positioning, and methodological clarification. It is intended as an interpretive and navigational resource for researchers across philosophy, governance studies, policy analysis, and interdisciplinary AI research.</p> <p><strong>Version 1 (2026-02-02): </strong>Initial Version</p> |
| title | Supplement III: Positioning the Wittenberg Framework Within the Contemporary Research Landscape |
| topic | Wittenberg Framework Comparative Meta-Governance AI Governance Cross-Cultural Ethics Normative Pluralism Moral Order Relational Ethics Regulatory Orientation Meta-Contextual Complexity Geometric Modelling Normative Architecture Comparative Philosophy |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18461074 |