The Experts below are selected from a list of 2496 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Maceratini Arianna - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Religione e sfera pubblica nella teoria del discorso di Jürgen Habermas
2020Co-Authors: Maceratini AriannaAbstract:SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. Linguaggio, discorso e ragione - 3. Linguaggio ordinario e linguaggi esperti - 4. Linguaggio e sfera pubblica - 5. La teoria del discorso e le tradizioni religiose: alcuni cenni sul pensiero di Habermas - 6. Il fondamentalismo religioso - 7. La “traduzione neutralizzante” - 8. Conclusioni. Religion and public sphere in Jürgen Habermas’s discoursive theory ABSTRACT: The relationship between religion and the public sphere, from the perspective of Habermas's theory of discourse, gives a glimpse of the possibility of a shared space, reflected in democratic decision-making procedures, which has priority over every strategic and self-referential representation of the social. The "linguisticization of the sacred" process has gradually led the author to free the theory of modernity from a rigid theory of secularization; on the other hand, the religious phenomenon, freed from obsolete dogmatisms, reveals itself as the bearer of a Procedural Rationality capable of operating in everyday communication practice. In this dialogic path, which is anything but linear, Habermas' communicative reason seeks to find solutions capable of safeguarding both religious dimensions and the legacy of Enlightenment thought. This, first of all, to stem the monological drift of particularistic global interests able to endorse, even in sectors of a public nature, dynamics typical of strategic-functional action that lead to the restriction of the common space and to the loss of effectiveness of the institutions traditionally deputies for the democratic representation of interests. At the resolution of these questions, the discursive reason does not offer a single answer but indicates a path of learning and constructive conciliation of the visions of the world
-
Religione e sfera pubblica nella teoria del discorso di Jürgen Habermas.
2020Co-Authors: Maceratini AriannaAbstract:Il rapporto tra religione e sfera pubblica, dalla prospettiva della teoria del discorso di Habermas, lascia intravedere la possibilità di uno spazio condiviso, riflesso nelle procedure decisionali democratiche, che ha la priorità su ogni strategica e autoreferenziale rappresentazione del sociale. Il processo di “linguisticizzazione del sacro” ha progressivamente condotto l’autore a svincolare la teoria della modernità da una rigida teoria della secolarizzazione; d’altro canto, il fenomeno religioso, affrancato da obsoleti dogmatismi, si rivela portatore di una razionalità Procedurale capace di operare nella prassi comunicativa quotidiana. In tale percorso dialogico, tutt’altro che lineare, la ragione comunicativa habermasiana mira alla ricerca di soluzioni in grado di salvaguardare tanto le dimensioni religiose quanto l’eredità del pensiero illuminista. Ciò, in primo luogo, per arginare la deriva monologica di particolaristici interessi globali in grado di avallare, anche in settori di natura pubblica, dinamiche tipiche dell’agire strategico-funzionale che conducono alla restrizione dello spazio comune e alla perdita di efficacia delle istituzioni tradizionalmente deputate alla rappresentanza democratica degli interessi. Alla risoluzione di tali interrogativi la ragione discorsiva non offre una risposta univoca ma indica un cammino di apprendimento e di costruttiva conciliazione delle visioni del mondo.The relationship between religion and the public sphere, from the perspective of Habermas's theory of discourse, gives a glimpse of the possibility of a shared space, reflected in democratic decision-making procedures, which has priority over every strategic and self-referential representation of the social. The "linguisticization of the sacred" process has gradually led the author to free the theory of modernity from a rigid theory of secularization; on the other hand, the religious phenomenon, freed from obsolete dogmatisms, reveals itself as the bearer of a Procedural Rationality capable of operating in everyday communication practice. In this dialogic path, which is anything but linear, Habermas' communicative reason seeks to find solutions capable of safeguarding both religious dimensions and the legacy of Enlightenment thought. This, first of all, to stem the monological drift of particularistic global interests able to endorse, even in sectors of a public nature, dynamics typical of strategic-functional action that lead to the restriction of the common space and to the loss of effectiveness of the institutions traditionally deputies for the democratic representation of interests. At the resolution of these questions, the discursive reason does not offer a single answer but indicates a path of learning and constructive conciliation of the visions of the world
-
Spazio e tempo nella Teoria dei sistemi di Niklas Luhmann
2020Co-Authors: Maceratini AriannaAbstract:Luhmann's General Theory of Systems analyzes the communications between social systems and the environment, to be controlled and reduced. The system must therefore refer to the environment, from which it differs by drawing its functional identity. At the spatial level, the system boundaries are determined by function: it traces the distinction between environmental complexity, reduced and maintained as an alternative of selection, and the complexity of reality to be reduced by transforming external unknowns into questions of Procedural Rationality. Systemic communications escape any temporal order: space and time are the average of observations and distinctions, exposed to the risk of deciding as a temporal constraint for the articulation of insecurity. Central is the notion of contingency, expression of a systemic logic open to the future and referring to the uncertainty of behavioral expectations. Maintaining social cohesion requires, however, to foresee the expectations placed in certain actions: the link between contingency and norm constitutes the reason for the functional differentiation of the legal system showing the specificity of law in containing social contingency, although the outcome of the judgment depends on Procedural correctness, verified by the persistence of systemic differentiation. Law exposes itself first of all to the unknowns of social complexity by contradicting its own functional reason for existence as a differentiated system.La Teoria Generale dei Sistemi di Luhmann analizza le comunicazioni tra i sistemi sociali e l’ambiente, da controllare e ridurre. Il sistema va, dunque, riferito all’ambiente, dal quale si differenzia traendone identità funzionale. A livello spaziale i confini del sistema sono determinati dalla funzione: essa traccia la distinzione tra la complessità ambientale, ridotta e mantenuta come alternativa di selezione, e la complessità del reale da ridurre trasformando le incognite esterne in quesiti di razionalità Procedurale. Le comunicazioni sistemiche sfuggono ad ogni ordine temporale: spazio e tempo sono media di osservazioni e distinzioni, esposti al rischio del decidere come vincolo temporale di articolazione dell’insicurezza. Centrale è la nozione di contingenza, espressione di una logica sistemica aperta al futuro e riferita all’incertezza delle attese comportamentali. Il mantenimento della coesione sociale richiede, tuttavia, di prevedere le aspettative riposte in determinate azioni: il nesso tra contingenza e norma costituisce la ragione della differenziazione funzionale del sistema giuridico mostrando la specificità del diritto nel contenere la contingenza sociale, sebbene l’esito del giudizio dipenda dalla correttezza Procedurale, verificata dal permanere della differenziazione sistemica. Il diritto espone, in primo luogo, se stesso alle incognite della complessità sociale contraddicendo la propria ragione funzionale di esistenza come sistema differenziato
Mark P Sharfman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the relationship between Procedural Rationality and political behavior in strategic decision making
1993Co-Authors: James W. Dean, Mark P SharfmanAbstract:Despite the central place of Rationality and political behavior in the decision-making literature, we know little about the relationship between these two dimensions. Can decisions be made using both rational and political methods, or must managers use one approach or the other? These questions were addressed in a study of 61 strategic decisions in 24 companies using a multiple-informant, structured interview protocol. Results indicate that Procedural Rationality and political behavior are independent dimensions of the strategic decision-making process. The implications of our findings for future strategic decision-making research are discussed.
-
Procedural Rationality IN THE STRATEGIC DECISION-MAKING PROCESS*
1993Co-Authors: James W. Dean, Mark P SharfmanAbstract:Despite the central place of Rationality in the organization theory, strategic management, and decision-making literatures, we know relatively little about why some strategic decision-making procedures are more rational than others. This question was addressed in a study of 57 strategic decisions in 24 companies, using a multiple-informant, structured interview protocol. Results indicate that environmental competitive threat, perceived external control of the organization, and the uncertainty of the strategic issues being addressed are related to Procedural Rationality. Surprisingly, some of these relationships were in the opposite direction from our predictions. These results are interpreted within a framework that emphasizes the link between Procedural Rationality and managerial discretion.
James W. Dean - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the relationship between Procedural Rationality and political behavior in strategic decision making
1993Co-Authors: James W. Dean, Mark P SharfmanAbstract:Despite the central place of Rationality and political behavior in the decision-making literature, we know little about the relationship between these two dimensions. Can decisions be made using both rational and political methods, or must managers use one approach or the other? These questions were addressed in a study of 61 strategic decisions in 24 companies using a multiple-informant, structured interview protocol. Results indicate that Procedural Rationality and political behavior are independent dimensions of the strategic decision-making process. The implications of our findings for future strategic decision-making research are discussed.
-
Procedural Rationality IN THE STRATEGIC DECISION-MAKING PROCESS*
1993Co-Authors: James W. Dean, Mark P SharfmanAbstract:Despite the central place of Rationality in the organization theory, strategic management, and decision-making literatures, we know relatively little about why some strategic decision-making procedures are more rational than others. This question was addressed in a study of 57 strategic decisions in 24 companies, using a multiple-informant, structured interview protocol. Results indicate that environmental competitive threat, perceived external control of the organization, and the uncertainty of the strategic issues being addressed are related to Procedural Rationality. Surprisingly, some of these relationships were in the opposite direction from our predictions. These results are interpreted within a framework that emphasizes the link between Procedural Rationality and managerial discretion.
Shuheng Chen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
computational intelligence in economics and finance carrying on the legacy of herbert simon
2005Co-Authors: Shuheng ChenAbstract:This is an editorial guide for the special issue on computational intelligence (CI) in economics and finance. A historical introduction to the background is given. This research paradigm is traced back to Herbert Simon, who, as a founder of artificial intelligence, pioneered the applications of AI to economics. The move from the classical AI to CI indicates a continuation of the legacy of Herbert Simon. Computational intelligence has proved to be a constructive foundation for economics. In responding to what Herbert Simon referred as Procedural Rationality, our study of bounded Rationality has been enriched by bringing autonomous agents into the economic analysis.
-
computational intelligence in economics and finance carrying on the legacy of
2005Co-Authors: Herbert A Simon, Shuheng ChenAbstract:This is an editorial guide for the special issue on computational intelligence (CI) in economics and finance. Ahistorical introduction to the background is given. This research paradigm is traced back to Herbert Simon, who, as a founder of artificial intelligence, pioneered the applications of AI to economics. The move from the classical AI to CI indicates a continuation of the legacy of Herbert Simon. Computational intelligence has proved to be a constructive foundation for economics. In responding to what Herbert Simon referred as Procedural Rationality, our study of bounded Rationality has been enriched by bringing autonomous agents into the economic analysis. 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Sopnamayee Acharya - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
impact of Procedural Rationality on decision making in supply chain management
2012Co-Authors: Sopnamayee AcharyaAbstract:Individual differences in decision making may account for much order variation in the supply chain settings and bear significant responsibility for supply chain inefficiencies. In a supply chain, sharing information among decision makers is required to justify the ordering inefficiencies. But individual perceptions may mediate in the use of available information in decision-making processes. This paper experiments the backlog costs for supply chain to minimize inventory holding. The analysis shows that when rational decision making with backlog information was applied, costs decreased, whereas consumer demand information increased the costs.