Foto:
Erik Fossen
- E-postsilje.langvatn@uib.no
- Telefon+47 55 58 27 32
- BesøksadresseParkveien 9Ida Bloms hus5007 Bergen
- PostadressePostboks 78055020 Bergen
Silje A. Langvatn er førsteamanuensis i politisk filosofi ved Senter for vitskapsteori (SVT). Ho har tidlegare hatt stillingar som postdoktor ved SVT, postdoktor ved PluriCourts, Universitet i Oslo, forskar ved Yale Law School (2016) og Fulbright Visiting Fellow ved Harvard Government Department (2009).
- Arrangør av workshop om proporsjonalitetsvurderingar i samarbeid med PluriCourts. Bergen, 6. og 7. juli 2023
- Innlegg: Academic freedom imaginaries, under SVT sitt jubileumsseminar: Akademisk fridom ved 35. Bergen, 23.09.2022
- Medarrangør og bidragsytar til workshop: Proporsjonalitetsvurderingar - korleis og kvifor? Arrangert i samarbeid med Eirik Holmøyvik med støtte frå PluriCourts (UiO) og Juridisk fakultet (UiB). Bergen, 10.05.2022
- Innlegg på SVT sitt symposium Sick Society: What makes corona measures justifiable? Bergen, 03.12.2021
- Mens Høyesterett grubler: Her er en guide til debattene i klimasøksmålets kjølvann. Saka nemner bl.a. debatten Langvatn og Sunde sette i gang i Klassekampen om klimarettsaka i Høgsterett. 3.12.2020
- Kronikk i Klassekampen om retorikken til regjeringsadvokaten i klimasaka i Høgsterett (med Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde): "Eit amerikanisert rettsvesen?" (17.11.20, bak betalingsmur)
- Debattinnlegg i Klassekampen - oppfølging av kronikken 17.11 (med Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde): Ulike syn, eller ulike måtar å argumentere for sitt syn (24.11.20, bak betalingsmur)
- Podcast, Dag og Tid 12.11.20: Hundreårets rettsak: Klimasaka i Høgsterett dag for dag (episoden er ikkje lenger tilgjengeleg)
- Kronikk: Kva er det norske? NRK Ytring, 19.11.2012
- Intervju i NRK-serien Vitenskapshvelvet om Verdiatlas (relatert til prosjektet Value Isobars - intervjuet startar ca. 03.08 i klippet). 03.11.2012
Nyaste publikasjonar
Langvatn, S.A. & Holst, C. (2022) Expert accountability: What does it mean, why is it challenging—and is it what we need? Constellations 00, 1– 16
When mistakes are made in political life, a standard remedy is to find someone to hold to account. But when experts who take part in governance make mistakes, they are seldom the ones who are held to account. So, is the solution to make these «unaccountable experts» more accountable? Not so quick, we argue. Case: The severe expert mistakes made in the preparation of the impact assessment report for opening the South Eastern Barents Sea for petroleum activity.
Holst, C., & Langvatn, S. A. (2021). Descriptive representation of women in international courts. Journal of Social Philosophy, 00, 1– 18
"Should Blacks Represent Blacks, and Women Represent Women? A Contingent "Yes" (Jane Mansbridge 1999). In a new article, Cathrine Holst and I revisit Mansbridge's article, which presented a systematic framework for evaluating the costs and benefits of such descriptive representation. Mansbridge developed her framework with elected assemblies in mind.
We look at how the calculus changes when the question is descriptive representation of women in international courts. For this type of institution, we argue, some of the costs of descriptive representation become costlier, and some of the benefits become weaker.
Publikasjonsoversikt i Cristin
- (2022). Expert accountability: what does it mean, why is it challenging - and is it what we need? Constellations. 16 sider.
- (2021). The Proportionality Test as a Test of Public reason.
- (2021). PluriCourts Lunch Seminar: What is it we disagree about when we disagree about the legitimacy of an institution? A framework for identifying and diagnosing legitimacy disagreements.
- (2021). Legitimacy Disagreements: A Framework of Analysis.
- (2021). Descriptive representation of women in international courts. Journal of Social Philosophy. 1-18.
- (2020). Understanding disagreements about the legitimacy of institutions.
- (2020). Ulike syn, eller ulike måtar å argumentere for sitt syn. Klassekampen.
- (2020). Taking Public Reason to Court: Understanding References to Public Reason in Discussions about Courts and Adjudication. 42 sider.
- (2020). Rewriting Academic Role Expectations in Light of Climate Change?
- (2020). Public Reason and Courts. Cambridge University Press.
- (2020). Preface to Public Reason and Courts. xi-xxxvi.
- (2020). Korleis kan forskarar skape tillit til forskning?
- (2020). Hvordan kan forskning være med på å skape tillit i samfunnet? ALLEA rapport. .
- (2020). Eit amerikanisert rettsvesen? Klassekampen. 2 sider.
- (2020). Domstolar sin legitimitet og klimarettsaka.
- (2019). What is it we disagree about, when we disagree about the legitimacy of an institution?
- (2019). Introduction to the Symposium: Political and Legal Theory on the Legitimacy of International Courts. Temple International and Comparative Law Journal. 242-246.
- (2019). International Courts as Exemplars of Global Public Reason .
- (2019). Hva er Demokrati? .
- (2018). What is it we disagree about, when we disagree about the legitimacy?
- (2018). Institutional legitimacy.
- (2018). Analyzing institutional legitimacy.
- (2018). Accountability of experts: What does it mean, why is it challenging - and is it what we need?
- (2018). Accountability of experts - is it what we need?
- (2017). What do we mean when we say that there is a legitimacy crisis for human rights?
- (2017). The turn from justice to legitimacy.
- (2017). Rawls' political political philosophy.
- (2017). Post public reason in an age of post-truth politics?
- (2017). Populist backlashes against international courts - Invited comment on Erik Voeten's PluriCourts annual lecture.
- (2017). Is there a place for public reason in post-truth politics?
- (2017). Do we improve the legitimacy of international courts by making them "more accountable"?
- (2017). Conceptualizing legitimacy in discussions about international courts.
- (2017). Conceptualizing and Measuring the Legitimacy of International Criminal Tribunals. 25 sider.
- (2017). Accountability of expertise? Frameworks for addressing the normative challenges of increasing reliance on experts.
- (2017). "The exemplar of public reason- A framework for analyzing public reason in courts".
- (2017). ""Use of public reason" or "the public use of reason""?
- (2016). Unge forskere sprenger grenser.
- (2016). Should International Courts Use Public Reason? Ethics and International Affairs. 355-377.
- (2016). Rawls' Political Liberalism Reconstructed. 33 sider.
- (2016). Public reason - an essentially contested term? Opening address.
- (2016). Legitimate, but unjust; just, but illegitimate: Rawls on political legitimacy. Philosophy & Social Criticism. 132-153.
- (2016). Judges as moral experts in courts.
- (2016). International Courts and non-arbitrary discretionary power.
- (2016). Et tverrfaglig problem.
- (2015). Why some international courts should sometimes use public reason, and what that might mean in practice.
- (2015). Why International Courts should use Public Reason.
- (2015). The Legitimacy of International Courts: How do we conceptualize it?
- (2015). Should International Courts use Public Reason?
- (2015). Rawls on Theoretical and Practical Reason.
- (2015). Legitimate, but Unjust. Just, but Illegitimate.
- (2015). International Courts' Public Reason.
- (2015). How much can O'Neill's justificatory approach to human rights justify? - Comment on Onora O'Neill's Grimen lecture.
- (2015). Expertise and Democratic Accountability in Courts and Public Administration.
- (2015). Deliberative demokratimodellar.
- (2015). Courts and Public Reason: Why International Courts May be a Special Case.
- (2014). What Does it Mean to Say that an International Court has a "Public Reason"?
- (2014). What Does it Mean to Say That an Tnternational Court Should "Reason in Public Reason"?
- (2014). Rawls' Late Political Liberalism.
- (2014). Rawls' Concept and Conception pf Legitimacy.
- (2014). Rawls' Concept and Conception of Political Legitimacy.
- (2014). Public reason and political legitimacy. 23 sider.
- (2014). Public Reason and the Legitimacy of International Courts.
- (2014). Politisk filosofi for eit sosialdemokrati. Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift. 343-346.
- (2014). Legitimacy.
- (2014). Er sosialdemokratiet liberalt?
- (2014). Daniel Bodansky's Analysis of Legitimacy.
- (2014). Borgardygder i Habermas og Rawls sine demokratimodellar.
- (2014). Book Review: International Criminal Justice: Legitimacy and Coherence, edited by G. Boas, W. A. Schabas and M. P. Scharf. Nordic Journal of International Law. 347-355.
- (2014). Blind Spots and Complementarity in Habermas' and Rawls' Models of Deliberative Democracy.
- (2014). 17.mai: Frå pølsefest til prinsippdiskusjon? - Kva forhold vanlege borgarar har, og kan ha, til konstitusjonen.
- (2014). 17. Mai: Frå pølsefest til prinsippdiskusjon - kva forhold vanlege borgarar har, og kan ha, til konstitusjonen.
- (2013). The Idea of an European Science and Technology Value Atlas.
- (2013). The Idea and Ideal of Public Reason – John Rawls’ Attempt to Conceptualize a Well-ordered Constitutional Democracy.
- (2013). Skuggeskrivarane.
- (2013). Reflections on the ICC-ASP Conference and International Criminal Justice.
- (2013). Rawls' shift in focus from "political justice" to "political legitimacy": What difference does it make?
- (2013). Rawls' røyst.
- (2013). Public Reason and Political Legitimacy.
- (2013). Meir enn Stemmerett.
- (2013). Kvinna - Den tause borgar.
- (2013). Grunnlov tatt for gitt? Demokrati og offentlig begrunnelse.
- (2013). Frå "De Stummes Lejr" til "idealet om offentlig fornuft".
- (2013). Ferdamann med stein i skoen. (Svar til Arild Pedersen sitt "Ferdaminne frå Skjervheimen" i Dag og Tid, 27.10.2013).
- (2013). Eit rom fullt av elefantar (Om ICC sitt statspartsmøte i Haag 2013).
- (2012). Suggestions for a Value-based Governance: The Idea of a ”European Science and Technology Value Atlas”. .
- (2012). Rawls on Legitimacy.
- (2012). Kvinna - Den tause borgaren.
- (2012). Kva er det norske? Kronikk.
- (2012). Kortfilm som presenterer Prosjektet Value Isobars og The European S&T Value Atlas.
- (2012). Intervju om prosjektet Value Isobars og The European Science &Technology Value Atlas.
- (2011). What Rawls asks of the individual.
- (2011). Superborgaren. Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift. 90-97.
- (2011). Superborgaren. Dagsavisen.
- (2011). Reconstructing Rawls' Political Liberalism.
- (2011). Rawls on "Public reason", Habermas on "Public use of Reason".
- (2011). Presentation of the idea of an European Science and Technology Value Atlas (ESTVA).
- (2011). Practice dependence and political constructivism in Rawls' Political Liberalism.
- (2011). Hemmelig val og offentlig fornuft.
- (2011). Eit nytt offentlegheitsideale? Aftenposten (morgenutg. : trykt utg.). 2 sider.
- (2010). Rawls' Idea of Public Reason - Between "Public Reasons" and "Reasoning in Public".
- (2010). Rawls om "offentlig fornuft" versus Habermas om "offentlig bruk av fornuften".
- (2010). Public Reason - Also in Private: On the importance of "Pre-public Reasoning" as part of Rawls' civic ideal.
- (2010). Private følelser og offentlig fornuft?
- (2010). Martha Nussbaum - i rettferdas nybrottsland. 23 sider.
- (2009). Grounding Political Morality- In Mediis Rebus.
- (2009). Can a liberal state support basic research? A Political Liberal Approach.
- (2008). Kan ein liberal stat støtte grunnforskning?
- (2007). Normative grounding in Political Liberalism: "postmetaphysical", "non-metaphysical" or "freestanding"?
- (2007). Gud i det offentlege, eller offentleg gudløyse? Politisk liberale tilnærmingar.
- (2007). Feminisme i Tangoland. Fett. 4 sider.
- (2005). Når sant må seiast- Ein diskusjon av Karl-Otto Apels transcendentalpragmatiske sanningskonsepsjon.
- (2005). Menn om Menn. Fett. 36.
- (2005). Martha Nussbaums universalistiske feminisme. Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift. 360-372.
- (2005). Eit muslimsk, feministisk dilemma. Fett. 52-53.
- (2005). Argumentativ reformasjon. Demo. 30-31.
- (2004). John Rawls: Ein teori om rettferd. Fett. 41-41.
- (2004). Aurdal versus Matlary og vice versa. Fædrelandsvennen.
- (2004). A Systematic Approach to Karl-Otto Apel's Explication of the Conception of Truth. Proceedings of the Durham-Bergen Postgraduate Philosophy Seminar. 73-96.
- (2001). Distributive Justice through International Law - A Discourse Ethical Approach.
Kompetansefelt
Forskergrupper
Tilknyttet innhold
