“We are making a great effort to create standards for dealing with conspiracy theories. Whether these standards are effective is one of my research interests.”

An interview with our fellow Sebastian Jaschke

A very constructive process

Romy & Jonathan: Hello Sebastian, you have been a member of the Research Training Group since April 2023. Could you share the motivations that led you to apply for the RTG “Standards of Governance”?

Sebastian: On the one hand, I found the topic highly engaging, as we encounter standards in virtually every aspect of our daily lives: educational systems, waste separation practices, deposit systems, digital file formats, monetary unions, and more. Our lives are deeply standardized, arguably more so than those of any previous generation. Yet, we rarely reflect on how these standards are established or how they influence us. On the other hand, I was particularly drawn to the concept of a structured doctoral program. During my studies, I came to value the exchange of ideas in colloquia, where critical feedback and unanticipated questions often proved to be highly constructive. This experience has been mirrored in my time within the RTG, where such exchanges have continued to enrich my research process.

“Standards create security, but also a strong rigidity”

Romy & Jonathan: The title of the RTG is quite broad. What are your preliminary reflections on the concept of “standards of governance”?

Sebastian: Firstly, there is the geographical standardization and interconnectivity of government actions, regulations, and laws, facilitated by international organizations such as the UN, the EU, NATO, the International Monetary Fund, and NGOs. This interconnectedness underscores the global reliance on shared frameworks. However, standards also exhibit significant path dependency, which can pose challenges, particularly in contexts such as digital transformation.

From a philosophical perspective, I am especially intrigued by the phenomenon of standards taking on a life of their own—what could be termed the “dehumanization” of bureaucracy—and its impact on individuals who interact with these systems. While standards provide stability and predictability, they also impose strong rigidity. For users, this rigidity often manifests as a perception that standards exist for their own sake, rather than being designed to serve the people operating within these systems. This tension between security and inflexibility raises important questions about the human experience in increasingly standardized environments.

Romy & Jonathan: What is the focus of your research, and in which thematic direction is your dissertation progressing?

Sebastian: My research focuses on conspiracy theories, particularly in the context of their dissemination in digital spaces, and on strategies to address and counteract them effectively. A key challenge in this area is the widespread sense of helplessness in engaging with conspiracy theorists. This raises critical questions about how to communicate scientific findings—on topics such as vaccine efficacy and risks, climate change, or democratic legitimacy—to individuals who appear disconnected from empirical realities. Various initiatives aim to address this issue. Federal and state centers for political education, for instance, have begun developing ‘guidelines’ for navigating these conversations. Additionally, fact-checking platforms scrutinize claims made by politicians, media outlets, and viral social media content, assessing their accuracy. While these efforts are commendable, the persistent gap between evidence-based communication and the acceptance of facts underscores the complexity of the problem. My research seeks to explore and evaluate these strategies to identify more effective approaches. We are making great efforts to create standards for dealing with conspiracy theories. Whether these standards are effective is one of my research interests.

“Conspiracy theories dissemination has been markedly accelerated by the increasing prevalence of digital communication.”

Romy & Jonathan: Thank you for providing insight into your project. To what degree does your research hold social relevance?

Sebastian: Conspiracy theories are an age-old phenomenon, yet they have only recently captured widespread public attention—an observation I often encounter in conversations outside academia—largely in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. Their dissemination has been markedly accelerated by the increasing prevalence of digital communication, which has amplified both their reach and their impact. Similarly, resistance to standardization has emerged as a pressing and contemporary issue. Over the past decade, there has been a noticeable rise in movements opposing standardization and transnational governance. Euroscepticism has intensified, separatist movements have gained traction in various European countries, and populist rhetoric often invokes the notion of a “deep state,” questioning the democratic legitimacy of established institutions. These developments are deeply concerning and, in this respect, the topic deserves a fundamental and theoretical analysis.

Romy & Jonathan: Has your doctoral project evolved or become more focused since you joined the RTG programme?

Sebastian: Not significantly. While I have incorporated some valuable suggestions from colleagues and the PIs, the overall structure of my project has remained largely unchanged.

“This often requires a rethinking of established views, yet it also stimulates thoughtful reflection.”

Romy & Jonathan: A doctorate within a Research Training Group differs from other forms of doctoral study in several ways. In your view, what are the key advantages of pursuing a doctorate within such a framework?

Sebastian: The structure of the rotating advanced seminars exposes us to diverse scholarly cultures and bodies of literature. This often requires a rethinking of established views, yet it also stimulates thoughtful reflection.Conferences and guest lectures further enrich this experience by providing opportunities to engage with academics from a wide range of disciplines. Additionally, working groups formed among the fellows have proven highly productive, particularly in deepening my understanding of standards. Furthermore, the program encourages early involvement in organizing events, offering valuable insight into the practical aspects of academic life.

Romy & Jonathan: The RTG comprises political scientists, sociologists, philosophers, and legal scholars. How does this interdisciplinarity and diversity contribute to the development of your doctoral project?

Sebastian: As previously mentioned, exposure to diverse disciplinary cultures facilitates the adoption of new perspectives. This can be particularly beneficial, even in the sense of aiding in the more precise delineation of one’s own research focus. More often, however, it proves invaluable to have access to a network of researchers with whom one can engage in dialogue, providing alternative viewpoints on specific aspects of one’s research.

Romy & Jonathan: How does the collaboration between the Goethe University and the Technical University of Darmstadt influence your research and doctoral project?

Sebastian: For the most part, I find myself spending more time on trains than I would under normal circumstances. However, this also presents an opportunity to familiarize myself with the two universities in greater depth. Having completed both my Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees at the TU, I had limited exposure to other institutions, so this experience has added a dynamic dimension to my academic journey.

“How are the terms such as ‘conspiracy’, ‘conspiracy theory’, ‘standards’ etc. interpreted across different languages?”

Romy & Jonathan: What benefits do you anticipate gaining from the international research opportunities provided within the framework of the Research Training Group?

Sebastian: I hope to gain a deeper understanding of how conspiracy theories are perceived in other countries, particularly those with their own historical context surrounding the topic, and how they are addressed in those regions. The issue of language is also crucial in this regard—how terms such as ‘conspiracy’, ‘conspiracy theory’, and ‘standards’ are interpreted across different languages. Given that we are all engaged in transnational research, an international research stay would offer significant content-related insights. Moreover, regarding the broader theme of ‘standards of governance’, such an experience could provide valuable lessons on how standards are enforced in other countries—standards that may be familiar to us from Germany but are potentially implemented in different ways depending on the country.

Romy & Jonathan: What are the key focus areas and objectives of your research in the coming months?

Sebastian: Our retreat sparked several new ideas. On one hand, the work within our group on digitalization will continue, focusing on developing the theoretical foundations for understanding digital standards. On the other hand, we had a particularly stimulating exchange with the female lawyers in the team, a conversation I am eager to pursue further. Over the next few months, I will be organizing my research stay abroad, which I hope to begin in the summer of 2025. Additionally, in September, I plan to attend several conferences, including the DGPhil congress, which will focus on issues related to digitality.

Romy & Jonathan: Thank you very much for your interesting answers.

The interview was conducted by Romy Knappe and Jonathan Mück in July 2024.