Search

As public intellectuals academics formulate specialized knowledge to become understandable and relevant for people outside of the specialty. There are two main forms of such intellectual activity: dissemination and debating. Scientific knowledge is a cultural value in its own right and also of importance in public discourse. Due to the complexity of the challenges facing modern societies the intellectual role of individual academics and scholarly institutions is increasingly important with mass education and new media techniques expanding the public sphere. It has become more important that specialists popularize also for specialists in other fields. Challenges such as climate change or social integration requires knowledgeable citizens and broad public discourses integrating specialized knowledge from several disciplines.Contemporary challenges in Western Europe, Scandinavia and the US are discussed. The historical perspectives are followed back to early Modernity. The cases include contributions on Holberg, the Myrdals and Boas. There are contributions on the recent transformations “East of the Elbe” and the challenges facing scholars in Turkey and India. The main focus of the book is on social scientists but the issues discussed are of general interest for all kinds of academics and for people interested in the cultural and political relevance of science.

The European enlargement process culminating in 2004 was - as a follow-up to die Wende and the implosion of the Russian empire - an event of the same magnitude as 1815 and 1919. Like 1918-19, it was an “exit into history”, a momentous event in post-Westphalian Europe. Even if acceptance of ten new countries was premature, it was appropriate to the moment history provided. The presence of the “New kids on the block” meant both problems and prospects. The end of the cold war meant the fall of the iron curtain – but a mental remnant of the curtain remains, in terms of attitudes regarding civility, corruption, and transparency, and expectations for democratic politics. Several of the “new” countries are “late children of 1848”. For them, entering NATO was more important than joining the EU, and also preceded EU-membership. Poland is bigger than the other 2004 countries together and has a heavy historical legacy. It is - as Germany used to be - imprinted by its special path between East and West and fear of being encircled by enemies. Although the Building of Civil Society and Democracy in countries in transformation can draw on experiences from the countries already within the EU, there is no primrose path for EU-integration. It is, moreover, an irony that the new member states, as a result of the expectations for post-Communist politics, build institutions of a kind that are no longer sufficiently efficient for “old” Europe. The new countries became a full-scale experiment in rule by experts: now by neo-liberals instead of Communists. A common European public sphere and civil society might emerge, but its form remains visible only at the horizon.