Search results

The period between the 1970s and 1980s witnessed the resurgence of fundamentalist Islam in a large part of the Muslim world, manifesting as calls in favor of a system of government based on an elitist rule in the name of Islam. The prominent Islamic thinker Fazlur Rahman (d.1988) was considered by many of his close associates as part of this wave. The present article is an attempt to prove that this assertion is incorrect by highlighting Fazlur Rahman's arguments in favour of the people's right to rule during a time when both the 'ulama' and the global Muslim public at large believed the opposite. Fazlur Rahman's strong faith in democracy could not let him sit idle, and he wrote in favour of the rule of the people and the role of the ummah in the business of the state through its elected representatives.

This article considers the use of social welfare organizations for political purposes, assesses the damage, and offers solutions. Part I of the article provides an overview of present law and compares social welfare and political organizations in the context of political campaign intervention. Part II considers the many serious ongoing harms that have resulted from the current legal framework. Part III assesses different solutions. The article concludes that in general, the disclosure and financing rules concerning the political activity of social welfare and political organizations should be consistent. Consistent rules would reduce incentives to deceive regulators and the public and help restore some integrity to the tax exemption system. Consistent rules would also pave the way to eliminate existing limits on political activity by social welfare organizations and reduce the role of the IRS in regulating speech.

Skateboarding poses a unique case study for considering the place of sport in human activity. The bulk of skateboarding scholarship argues that skateboarding is largely a subversion of rule governance, a view difficult to square with common and popular rule-governed skateboarding competitions, now including the Olympics. We attempt to resolve this tension by arguing for a kind of pluralism: skateboarding's engagement in rule-governed competition is distinctly subversive, yielding the claim that skateboarding is both sport and subversion. This pluralism is examined in an "ecological" framework of emergent activities defined by push-pull interactive relationships between skateboarders and their environment that change the meaning of their spaces—whether domestic, urban, or competitive—to spaces that are both wild and spontaneous. We conclude with reflections on how skateboarding provides understanding of sport in the space of ecological meaning.

Abstract
Plato's references to Empedocles in the myth of the Statesman perform a crucial role in the overarching political argument of the dialogue. Empedocles conceives of the cosmos as structured like a democracy, where the constituent powers 'rule in turn', sharing the offices of rulership equally via a cyclical exchange of power. In a complex act of philosophical appropriation, Plato takes up Empedocles' cosmic cycles of rule in order to 'correct' them: instead of a democracy in which rule is shared cyclically amongst equal constituents, Plato's cosmos undergoes cycles of the presence and absence of a single cosmic monarch who possesses 'kingly epistēmē'. By means of a revision of Empedocles' democratic cosmology, Plato's richly woven myth is designed precisely to reject the appropriateness of democracy as a form of human political association and legitimate monarchy in its stead.

In this article we explore how variables associated both with material temptations (economic incentives that foster rule breaking) and nonmaterial behavioral determinants (protective factors that shield people from rule breaking) are linked to compliance with food laws. The object of the study is to examine food businesses in the ready‐to‐eat industry in three districts of the German capital, Berlin. We collected data on compliance behavior and its potential drivers via an anonymous postal survey in 2014. Accounting for the data structure, we used a generalized ordered logit regression to model the relationship between the presumed behavioral drivers and compliance. One crucial finding is that a feeling of embarrassment if relevant others were to learn about noncompliance is positively related to compliance. The same holds for the internalized approval of food laws and their enforcement (acceptance of rules).

ABSTRACTChoosing the right subset from a set of candidate projects is a key driver of success and failure in new product development (NPD). In many cases, managers make these decisions based on intuition or simple rules. We investigate how human decision makers act in the context of project portfolio selection conducting experimental studies based on the knapsack problem. We address the question about which decision rules people apply to select a portfolio and how cognitive limitations influence their selection process. Grounded in portfolio selection practice, we investigate subjects' adherence to four heuristics. Decision making is partially explained by adherence to one simple decision rule, but decision makers' cognitive capacity limits the application of this heuristic. Subjects' cognitive deficits can be avoided by offering basic decision support, thereby increasing their heuristic adherence and their performance.

"Majority Judgment" is an evaluative voting rule that picks a candidate with the best median evaluation. This paper deals with the following question: what does one do when choosing according to the best median? This principle amounts to finding which half-population should be neglected in order to satisfy, in the sense of a Rawlsian compromise, the other half. This principle clashes with the definition of democracy as the participation of everyone, not half of the population plus one. Moreover, providing the highest possible level of satisfaction to that half-population that is the easiest to satisfy is not what is achieved by the rules of choice called "majoritarian," which respect the Condorcet principle. On the contrary, these rules favor consensual solutions, in particular in standard political environments. This explains why the "Majority Judgment" often yields surprising outcomes. ____________

"Majority Judgment" is an evaluative voting rule that picks a candidate with the best median evaluation. This paper deals with the following question: what does one do when choosing according to the best median? This principle amounts to finding which half-population should be neglected in order to satisfy, in the sense of a Rawlsian compromise, the other half. This principle clashes with the definition of democracy as the participation of everyone, not half of the population plus one. Moreover, providing the highest possible level of satisfaction to that half-population that is the easiest to satisfy is not what is achieved by the rules of choice called "majoritarian," which respect the Condorcet principle. On the contrary, these rules favor consensual solutions, in particular in standard political environments. This explains why the "Majority Judgment" often yields surprising outcomes. ____________

"Majority Judgment" is an evaluative voting rule that picks a candidate with the best median evaluation. This paper deals with the following question: what does one do when choosing according to the best median? This principle amounts to finding which half-population should be neglected in order to satisfy, in the sense of a Rawlsian compromise, the other half. This principle clashes with the definition of democracy as the participation of everyone, not half of the population plus one. Moreover, providing the highest possible level of satisfaction to that half-population that is the easiest to satisfy is not what is achieved by the rules of choice called "majoritarian," which respect the Condorcet principle. On the contrary, these rules favor consensual solutions, in particular in standard political environments. This explains why the "Majority Judgment" often yields surprising outcomes. ____________

"Majority Judgment" is an evaluative voting rule that picks a candidate with the best median evaluation. This paper deals with the following question: what does one do when choosing according to the best median? This principle amounts to finding which half-population should be neglected in order to satisfy, in the sense of a Rawlsian compromise, the other half. This principle clashes with the definition of democracy as the participation of everyone, not half of the population plus one. Moreover, providing the highest possible level of satisfaction to that half-population that is the easiest to satisfy is not what is achieved by the rules of choice called "majoritarian," which respect the Condorcet principle. On the contrary, these rules favor consensual solutions, in particular in standard political environments. This explains why the "Majority Judgment" often yields surprising outcomes. ____________

Abstract: The contribution aims to evaluate some problematic issues addressed by the UK Supreme Court decisions on penalty clauses, taking into account discussions among Italian scholars and rulings of Italian jurisprudence. The focus is put on the issue of whether the rule against penalties should be abrogated or extended, on the scope of application of the rule against penalties (i.e. if it is applicable to primary obligations), on the benchmark to assess whether the rule against penalties should be applied and, finally, on the interpretation of the expressions 'imbalance in the parties rights' and 'contrary to the requirements of good faith' established by the Unfair Terms Directive. In conclusion, in the light of the innovative judgment, an assessment of the relationship between contractual freedom and the need to protect the debtor of a penalty will be put forward.

One interpretation of complexity science is that it distinguishes two types of science—an equilibrium science of forces, as begun by Newton, and a complexity science of rules, as exemplified by Wolfram (2002). If you accept that argument, then there are also two types of economics—an equilibrium economics in which forces move resources around the economy, and a complexity economics in which generic rules structure knowledge in an economy (Dopfer & Potts, 2008). However, this also implies two types of economic policy—a policy framework based on reallocating resources and a policy framework based on redesigning rules (Colander & Kupers, 2014). Modern economic policy generally engages in both, but we argue that this reflects the idea that modern economic policy has not caught up with complexity science. We illustrate how this difference plays out in the particular domain of innovation policy.

In artificial neural networks, the knowledge stored as the strength of the interconnection weights is modified through a processcalled learning, using a learning algorithm. This algorithmic function, in conjunction with a learning rule, (i.e., back-propagation) is used tomodify the weights in the network in an orderly fashion. In this proposed system a technique is used for extracting business knowledge fromtrained ANNs. It is organized into four sections that include acquisition of business data, knowledge extraction, representation by rules, andController for maintain the consistency of knowledge. The technique will use Back-propagation NN to predict stock prices and stockperformance based on input of external variants such as government policies, quarterly export volumes etc. The application will also providerecommendations (or decisions) based on expected outcome, overall customer portfolio, and current market situation. Key Words: neural network, knowledge acquisition, knowledge extraction, rules, back propagation algorithm.

The idea of the research university as a key institution for social and economic development in knowledge-intensive societies has been adopted by the Ukrainian government after the fall of the communist regime. Establishing research universities is a long journey during which many things might happen. To understand this journey better in the case of Ukrainian research universities, we applied an analytical framework derived from the concept of travel and translation of ideas. This concept analyses reform through three types of editing rules: the rules of context, logic and formulation. These editing rules have guided our analysis of data gathered from policy documents complemented by face-to-face interviews. We conclude that the idea as introduced came to little, as the turbulent political context precluded long-term planning and universities were faced with conflicting policies.

Public shaming has long been used in societies to maintain order in communities, and to enforce not only laws, but unspoken rules or societal constraints. However, while public shaming can be a valuable tool for communities, it can also lead to unjust rule – some might even call it mob rule. While many citizens of the United States tend to glorify democracy and the effects of democracy, the democratization of the justice system through public shaming has resulted in disastrous consequences in American history and promises dangerous repercussions if it continues to be used in the future. This claim is evidenced by an analysis of literary works from the seventeenth century and later which reveal a trend of bullying through public shaming. After a long absence from society, these unsettling trends seem to be reappearing in the twenty-first century.