Rational Resolution Research Articles

표현의 자유와 국가의 역할 그리고 상호주체성

The expansion of social networks among individuals has sparked discussions about freedom of expression and its limitations. Due to the development of technology, individuals have been able to share their experiences, knowledge, and thoughts without particular and/or restrictive difficulties. The basis of conversation initiates from comprehension. The public sphere is the product of a great plan through the restoration of reason to overcome the problems of a society that centered only on the pre-modernity. The formation of a public sphere presupposes overcoming the paradoxical situation of rationalization. If we are to leave behind comprehensive dogmatic that we can not compromise on and find topics on which we can achieve ‘overlapping consensus’, we must adhere to minimal rules of communication. Autonomy in a community can be secured by guaranteeing freedom of expression, and the state's restrictions on this should remain in an auxiliary role for the expansion of public reason. What something is valuable doesn't always mean we should enforce it to another. Beyond the belief that freedom of expression is an extension of autonomy through rational resolution of conflicts, we must have the duty to respect others under the value of solidarity.

Language Management in Iraqi Kurdistan

Language management is a discipline that consists of satisfying the needs of people who speak multiple different languages. These may be in the same country, in companies, and in cultural or international institutions where one must use multiple languages. In the Iraqi Kurdistan context, we are presented with a linguistic situation where two languages are constitutionally official, i.e., Arabic and Kurdish while English is adopted as the solitary means of instruction in some schools/colleges/universities besides the fact Turkmani and Assyrian are spoken and adopted as means of instruction in schools of areas where the Turkmen and Assyrians are a majority. This linguistic reality calls for a sound and rational resolution or management at all levels, particularly at the academic levels which we are interested in here.Thus, the main aim of the present study is to suggest ways on how to take the multilingual situation in Iraqi Kurdistan to an English plus situation in a similar manner we have witnessed in Singapore.

Zagadnienia racjonalnego tworzenia prawa

The article deals with the problems of rational legislation, and falls into three parts.The first part embraces terminological data and a very brief discussion of certain shortcomings of the legislative process in Poland. In the second one an attempt has been made to formulate a model of rational legislative process. In the third one some postulates as to how law should be made have been put forward.In order to put into shape a model of a legislative process it is necessary to formulate an exhaustive amount of questions (problems), to be resolved by legislators, and to establish in what sequence they should be resolved. The new suggestions as to the legislative process have been inspired by the shortcomings of the present system of jurisdiction and the imperfections of the present legislative practice. Among the directives related to the legislative process those have been distinguished and discussed which either point to the foundations of the postulated bills and amendments, or specify the conditions behind a rational resolution concerned with the effect of the legislation on public life, finally those which pertain to the choise of legal measures, indicate how to optimize the legislative work and formulate the texts of the provisions of the law. Due mention has also been made of the directives which establish an ideological model of legislation in a socialist state, i.e. pertaining to democratizing the legislative process and the rule of law in the legislative activities of the state.

게임산업 활성화를 위한 법정책적 연구

In Korea, regulations on games are strengthened by a negative perspective, such as overindulgence, despite their value as a recreational culture and their industrial value. Attention is paid only to the negative aspects of games, while the effects of the game industry on the national economy and the characteristics and positive functions of games are disregarded. In addition, regulations themselves are pursued instead of seeking fundamental and rational resolutions based on the analysis of causes. This can be seen as a problem. Even when the need for regulations on games is accepted, efforts should be made to minimize the negative effects of such regulations. For these reasons, this study suggests the following as considerations in reforming current game regulations. First, game regulations should be allowed only to the extent they do not infringe the freedom to use games. In other words, the enactment of game regulations should be within the limits of restricting fundamental rights, such as the principle of proportionality. Second, on the one hand, a regulation system should be strengthened to maintain public welfare and order by supplementing defects of necessary regulations; on the other hand, unnecessary and unreasonable regulations should be modified to promote autonomy and creativity in social and economic activities, improve the quality of life for the people, and constantly enhance national competitiveness. Third, if administrative rules are abused, the rule of law and the principle of the legality of administration would be put at great risk and administrative rules could be used as a basis for the so called ‘shadow regulations.’ Therefore, it is desirable that major content of regulations is regulated by laws to improve the expertise and consistency in game regulations. Fourth, in a bid to promote the game industry, it is necessary to depart from ex ante regulations, which restrict rights or impose obligations beforehand, and consider with priority ex-post regulations, which restrict rights or impose obligations after the fact as necessary. Fifth, it is necessary to consider cost-incurring factors resulting from regulations through cost-benefit analysis. Regulations must use the most effective means to achieve a goal, and a means should be used to achieve the highest goal. Sixth, it would reasonable to have the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism get the jurisdiction of the regulations to secure the consistency and unity of regulations.

Альтернатива вирішення міжособистісних конфліктів принципу «око за око»

The relevance of the research topic lies in the stereotypical perception of the biblical Old Testament concept of revenge, and its interpretations for modern times. The article examines the conflict as a sociocultural phenomenon. Five interpersonal methods of conflict resolution generally accepted in society have been identified, including withdrawal, concession, struggle, compromise, and cooperation. The results of the study indicate that sometimes it is possible to change the direction of the development of the conflict, simply by looking at it differently. That is why the problem of finding an alternative solution to interpersonal conflicts of the “eye for an eye” principle needs urgent consideration. The research involves finding out what the conflict is in the social plane. The biblical principle “an eye for an eye” and its connotation in the 21st century. is considered as the key to solving problems in individual interpersonal relationships. One of the goals of the study is to illustrate that the principles taught in the Holy Scriptures are still valid today. If people paid more attention to what is written in the Bible, many unnecessary misunderstandings could be avoided. Military, international misunderstandings, unresolved interpersonal issues, etc., are realities of the XXI century. One of the reasons for this is various unresolved interpersonal issues of a social and legal nature. This type of conflict usually leads to suffering, oppression, disrespect, and other negative consequences that spoil the lives of families, states, nations, and the whole world. Conflict situations in the world are not a new phenomenon, since the misunderstanding between God and the cherub Lucifer originated in heaven and was transferred to the earthly world. This conflict is vividly reflected in the pages of the Bible. It is on the pages of the Old Testament that there are controversial situations that at first glance contradict the character of the loving Yahweh. Such controversial passages include the saying recorded in the book of Leviticus 24:20 «an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth». This study is implemented on the example of how different religions, including Protestant Adventism, understand this principle in a modern interpretation. In general, the search for alternatives for the rational resolution of interpersonal conflicts allows us to reflect on the current trends in modern conflict studies.

Deep Disagreement in Mathematics

Disagreements that resist rational resolution, often termed ``deep disagreements'', have been the focus of much work in epistemology and informal logic. In this paper, I argue that they also deserve the attention of philosophers of mathematics. I link the question of whether there can be deep disagreements in mathematics to a more familiar debate over whether there can be revolutions in mathematics. I propose an affirmative answer to both questions, using the controversy over Shinichi Mochizuki's work on the abc conjecture as a potential example of both phenomena. I conclude by investigating the prospects for the resolution of mathematical deep disagreements in virtue-theoretic approaches to informal logic and mathematical practice.

A Gnostic Noir: Y.B.'s Explication of the Algerian Crisis

Abstract: The Algerian writer Y.B. (Yassir Benmiloud) originally established himself as a satirical journalist and critic of the Algerian regime before publishing his first novel, L'Explication , from exile in Paris in 1999. Although it was met with a relative lack of critical attention, reserved more for his third novel Allah Superstar (2003), which examines the place of Muslims in post 9/11 France, L'Explication is a dynamic reimagining of noir that "others" the classically Western genre. While respecting many of the tropes of detective and noir fiction, including the gradual unveiling of the criminals and their motives for murder, an investigator-focused narrative, temporal doubling, and sassy one-liners, L'Explication deviates from reader expectations with its autobiographical elements, hybridity, and its refusal to provide a rational resolution to the investigation. The novel is imbued with a Sufi mystical structure and ideology that exist uncomfortably alongside, and call into question, French rationalism, the underpinning of a classical detective story. Y.B.'s criminal investigation proceeds along unexpected lines to become an esoteric interpretation of the history of Islam in North Africa and the rise of Algeria's cabinet noir during the 1990s civil war. This article will show that L'Explication is at once a detective novel and a parody of both that genre and of Islamic exegesis. The parodic elements allow Y.B. to circumvent censure, while offering an indirect means of giving voice to national trauma as he endeavors to explain the seemingly inexplicable Algerian civil war.

England's Life of Paradox

England's Life of Paradox

On the rational resolution of (deep) disagreements

Disagreements come in all shapes and sizes, but epistemologists and argumentation theorists have singled out a special category referred to as deep disagreements. These deep disagreements are thought to pose philosophical and practical difficulties pertaining to their rational resolution. In this paper, I start with a critique of the widespread claim that deep disagreements are qualitatively different from normal disagreements because they arise from a difference in ‘fundamental principles’ or ‘hinge commitments.’ I then defend the following two claims: (1) All disagreements are deep to the extent that they are actual disagreements. This first claim implies, I will argue, that disagreements typically regarded as normal (‘shallow’) can be explained away as misunderstandings or communicative mishaps. (2) The resolution of a disagreement can be rational either through a joint experience of mutually recognized facts or through an exchange of arguments that leads to a reformulation of the disagreement that, in this new form, lends itself to a resolution through a joint experience of mutually recognized facts. I conclude with a reflection on the consequences of these two theses for the idea of deep disagreement and that of rational resolution.

Pluralismo de valores, liberalismo y modus vivendi en la teoría política de John Gray

The aim of this article is to analyze pluralism that runs transversally through John Gray’s political thought, a British theorist whose work occupies a relevant position in the field of contemporary political theory. To this end, the more intellectual and non-ideological side of his thought is here examined; in other words, his works focused on political theorizing. Firstly, it is analyzed how Gray defines value pluralism on the basis of three interrelated ideas: plurality, incommensurability and impossibility of rational resolution of value conflicts. Even if Gray adopts a radical notion of incommensurability, he also attributes certain limits to it; what is of great importance to understand his whole political theory. Secondly, it is examined the connection between value pluralism and Gray’s political proposal. On the one hand, the article focuses on his «negative» criticism of liberalism and communitarianism, as well as his more or less explicit defense of multiculturalism. On the other hand, the article examines Gray’s «positive» political theory, as it is reflected in his proposal of modus vivendi, which displays some sort of ambiguity as a consequence of his double understanding of value pluralism both as descriptive and normative. Finally, it is argued that this ambiguity is explained, too, by Gray’s balanced view of politics, for whom considerations of legitimacy and normativity are not overridden altogether by the indeterminate, contextual and contingent political processes involved in establishing a modus vivendi. Ultimately, this contributes to shape Gray’s sui generis political theory.

CONFLICT, DICTATORSHIP, AND ARROW’S IMPOSSIBILITY THEOREM

Abstract: Since the 18th century, doubt has been raised concerning “rational” majoritarian public choice: the “voting paradox” holds, in a simple calculation made famous by the Marquis de Condorcet, that rational resolution of divergent preferences by voting is impossible. The economist Kenneth Arrow extended this in 1951 to prove that no rational order of diverse preferences [R] is possible other than dictatorship for a group of any size. But Arrow’s meaning of “rational” assumes fixed preferences instantaneously analyzed, and ignores any preference adjustment, necessary in social conflict resolution. If preferences do adjust to resolve conflicts, Arrow’s theorem reduces to the formula that any group of unyielding preference holders can only be governed by dictatorship.

Acids and Rust: A New Perspective on the Chemical Revolution

AbstractThis paper uses scientific perspectivism as a lens for understanding acid experiments from the Chemical Revolution. I argue that this account has several advantages over several recent interpretations of this period, interpretations that do not neatly capture some of the historical experiments on acids. The perspectival view is distinctive in that it avoids discontinuity, allows for the rational resolution of disagreement, and is sensitive to the historical epistemic context.

Planned Early Dispute Resolution Systems and Elements: Experiences and the Promise of Technology

The COVID-19 outbreak has severely impacted global business communities. Experts predict a tsunami of disputes. In this unprecedented situation, rational, cost-effective and quick dispute resolution is no more an option but a need. This need may be met by Planned Early Dispute Resolution (PEDR) and technological tools. Although the uptake of both has been slow so far, the current crisis may act as a catalyst for their more extensive use. This article starts with an overview of PEDR by addressing its definition, models, elements and use, among other aspects. It then investigates actual experiences of companies with PEDR systems and elements and discusses the effect that the companies’ shift to PEDR has on law firms. The article concludes by exploring how PEDR systems can benefit from the use of technological tools and how the interaction between technology and dispute resolution can contribute to shaping the future of the legal profession.

Common Sense, Scepticism and Deep Epistemic Disagreements

Considering the persisting disagreement between the common sense philosophers and the sceptics, it seems that they are faced with a deep epistemic disagreement. Taking stock from Wittgenstein’s On Certainty, one generally thinks that deep epistemic disagreements cannot be rationally resolved. Hinge epistemology, inherited from Wittgenstein, is also considered as an illuminating detour to understand common sense epistemology. But is there really a deep epistemic disagreement between the common sense philosophers and the sceptics? Could it not be considered that they share a common background? If so, is the rational resolution of their disagreement logically possible? What rational means can common sense use to convince someone of the privileged status of an epistemic principle? Relying on Reid’s, Alston’s and Lynch’s arguments, I show that common sense epistemology is a more promising approach than hinge epistemology, because it is driven by an optimism about reason in the solving of deep epistemic disagreements.

Language Management in Iraqi Kurdistan

Language management is a discipline that consists of satisfying the needs of people who speak multiple different languages. These may be in the same country, in companies, and in cultural or international institutions where one must use multiple languages. In the Iraqi Kurdistan context, we are presented with a linguistic situation where two languages are constitutionally official, i.e., Arabic and Kurdish while English is adopted as the solitary means of instruction in some schools/colleges/universities besides the fact Turkmani and Assyrian are spoken and adopted as means of instruction in schools of areas where the Turkmen and Assyrians are a majority. This linguistic reality calls for a sound and rational resolution or management at all levels, particularly at the academic levels which we are interested in here.Thus, the main aim of the present study is to suggest ways on how to take the multilingual situation in Iraqi Kurdistan to an English plus situation in a similar manner we have witnessed in Singapore

On the Rational Resolvability of Deep Disagreement Through Meta-argumentation: A Resource Audit

Robert Fogelin argued that the efficacy of our acts of reasons-giving depends on the normalcy of our discourse—to the extent that discourse is not normal disagreements occurring in it are deep; and to the extent that disagreements are deep, they are not susceptible to rational resolution. Against this, Maurice Finocchiaro argues that meta-argumentation can contribute to the rational resolution of disagreements having depth. Drawing upon a competency view of reasons-giving, this article conducts an inventory and audit of meta-argumentation’s resolution resources for disagreements having depth. It concludes that, because Finocchiaro mischaracterizes the relationship between meta-argumentation and normalcy in the underlying discourse, he systematically overstates the rational resolution value of meta-argumentation. To the extent that meta-argumentation can contribute to the rational resolution of disagreements, those disagreements are normal, not deep. According to the competency view, the only way to resolve depth in disagreement is to first re-establish its normalcy.

Courageous Arguments and Deep Disagreements

Deep disagreements are characteristically resistant to rational resolution. This paper explores the contribution a virtue theoretic approach to argumentation can make towards settling the practical matter of what to do when confronted with apparent deep disagreement, with particular attention to the virtue of courage.

The fitting resolution of anger

How can we explain the rational diminution of backward-looking emotions (e.g., grief, regret, and anger) without resorting to pragmatic or wrong kind of reason explanations? That is to say, how can the diminution of these emotions not only be rational but fitting? In this paper, I offer an answer to this question by considering the case of anger. In Sect. 1, I examine Pamela Hieronymi’s account of forgiveness as the rational resolution of resentment. I argue that Hieronymi’s account rests on an assumption about the rationality of emotions (and of attitudes in general)—namely, that a rational (and fitting) change in emotion entails a change in the fact that constitutes the reason for the emotion. Then, in Sect. 2, I consider Agnes Callard’s recent criticism of accounts like Hieronymi’s as well as Callard’s alternative account of the rational resolution of anger. I argue that Callard offers a promising account but fails to explain how it avoids the criticism she levels against Hieronymi and others. Finally, in Sect. 3, I reject Hieronymi’s assumption and argue that an emotion can cease to be fitting without any change in the fact that constitutes the reason for it. I also explain how my proposal can complement Callard’s account of the rational dissipation of anger. My discussion of anger leads to a solution to the general problem about backward-looking emotions: a fitting backward-looking emotion can fittingly diminish when it is part of a process that is itself a fitting response to the past occurrence.

Searching for Deep Disagreement in Logic: The Case of Dialetheism

According to Fogelin’s account of deep disagreements, disputes caused by a clash in framework propositions are necessarily rationally irresolvable. Fogelin’s thesis is a claim about real-life, and not purely hypothetical, arguments: there are such disagreements, and they are incapable of rational resolution. Surprisingly then, few attempts have been made to find such disputes in order to test Fogelin’s thesis. This paper aims to rectify that failure. Firstly, it clarifies Fogelin’s concept of deep disagreement and shows there are several different breeds of such disagreements. Thus, to fully assess Fogelin’s thesis, it will be necessary to seek out cases of each breed to evaluate their rational irresolvability. Secondly, it begins this task by looking at a significant debate within the logical literature over the truth of contradictions. We demonstrate that, while the debate exemplifies a breed of deep disagreement, the parties involved can supply one another with rationally compelling reasons.

Bioequivalence for highly variable drugs: regulatory agreements, disagreements, and harmonization.

Regulatory authorities introduced procedures in the last decade for evaluating the bioequivalence (BE) for highly variable drugs. These approaches are similar in principle but differ in details. For example, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommend differing regulatory constants. The constant suggested by FDA results in discontinuity of the BE limits around the switching variation at 30% observed within-subject variation of the reference product. The regulatory constant of EMA does not have these problems. The Type I error reaches 6-7% around the switching variation with the EMA constant but 16-17% with the FDA constant. Various procedures were recently suggested, especially for the EMA approach, to eliminate the inflation of the Type I error. Notably, the so-called Exact algorithms try to amalgamate the positive features of both EMA and FDA procedures without their negative sides. The computational procedure for the EMA approach is simple and has a straightforward interpretation. The procedure for the FDA approach is based on an approximation, has a bias at small degrees of freedom, and requires a suitable computer program. All regulatory agencies impose a second requirement constraining the point estimate of the ratio of geometric means. In addition, EMA and Health Canada impose an upper limit for applying the recommended procedures. These expectations have psychological motivation and political rationale but no scientific foundations. Their inclusion results in incorrect and misleading interpretation of the principal criterion which involves confidence intervals. Different regulatory authorities expect to apply their approaches either to both AUC and Cmax or only to AUC or only to Cmax. Rational resolution of the disharmonization is needed.