Suchergebnisse

Predmet doktorske disertacije je problem konstituisanja političkog tela u demokratskim teorijama. Ovaj se problem u savremenoj analitičkoj političkoj teoriji uobičajeno razmatra kao problem ograničenja demosa, odnosno pitanje kako je moguće demokratski ograničiti demos, dok se u kontinentalnoj političkoj teoriji pre razmatra kao pitanje konstituisanja demosa odnosno kao jedan od paradoksa politike i demokratije. Metodološki se rad priklanja drugom načinu razmatranja ovog pitanja. Zastupam stanovište da je demokratsko konstituisanje demosa logički nerešiv problem te da, umesto pokušaja da se on trajno reši, treba razotkriti paradokse utemeljivačkih priča i hronični nedostatak legitimnosti na ma koji način ograničenog političkog tela. Produktivnije je misliti o načinima da se početne nepravde prema isključenima isprave ili ublaže i da se sastav političkog tela (demosa) naknadno legitimiše demokratskim rekonstituisanjem. Tvrdi se da se političko telo može demokratski rekonstituisati putem ne samo izvanrednih već i svakodnevnih političkih momenata tokom kojih se pregovaraju i osporavaju veze između narodnog suvereniteta i ljudskih prava. Takve situacije osporavanja i pregovaranja su one kada se obnavlja članstvo starim članovima ili priznaje članstvo novim članovima, o čemu se obično misli kao o kompozicionoj dimenziji demosa koja odgovara na pitanje ko je pasivni član, odnosno gde su spoljašnje granice političkog tela. Postoje takođe i situacije redefinisanja političkog identiteta i pokretanja kolektivne akcije što je način da se razmotri performativna dimenzija demosa odnosno unutrašnje granice političkog tela - ko može biti aktivni član i koliki je jaz između demosa i političkog tela. Performativna dimenzija demosa fokusira se na načine na koje demos zahteva priznanje da je demos i istovremeno proizvodi, otelotvoruje sebe, kao političko telo u nastajanju. ; The topic of this doctoral dissertation is the problem of constitution of the body politic in democratic theories. In contemporary analytic political theory this problem has been most commonly dealt with as the boundary problem that asks how to delimit the demos democratically, but in continental political theory it is rather considered as an issue of constitution of the demos and as one of the political and democratic paradoxes. This study has embraced the second methodological approach in tackling this issue. I contend that the original constitution of the demos by democratic means is logically impossible so instead of a quest for a permanent solution of this problem, the paradoxes of the stories of founding as well as chronic legitimacy deficit of any bounded bodies politic should be exposed. It is more productive to rethink the ways to remedy or mitigate the initial injustices committed toward the excluded from the demos and to legitimize the recomposition of the body politic (demos) via subsequent democratic reconstitution. It is argued that political body can be democratically reconstituted not just during extraordinary but also during ordinary, everyday political moments, when relations between popular sovereignty and human rights are negotiated and contested. The opportunities for these contestations and negotiations are situations of restoration of membership for the old members and recognition of membership to the new members, usually understood as situations addressing the compositional dimension of demos that responds to the question who is the passive member, and where should the external boundaries of the demos be drawn. But there are also situations when political identity can be redefined, especially when collective action is initiated, opportunities when performative dimension of the demos is activated, and which informs us about struggles concerning the internal boundaries of the demos - who can be an active member and how deep is the gap between the demos and the body politic. Performative account of the demos focus on the ways in which the demos demands recognition as the demos and at the same time enacts itself as an emerging body politic.

The topic of this doctoral dissertation is the problem of constitution of the body politic in democratic theories. In contemporary analytic political theory this problem has been most commonly dealt with as the boundary problem that asks how to delimit the demos democratically, but in continental political theory it is rather considered as an issue of constitution of the demos and as one of the political and democratic paradoxes. This study has embraced the second methodological approach in tackling this issue. I contend that the original constitution of the demos by democratic means is logically impossible so instead of a quest for a permanent solution of this problem, the paradoxes of the stories of founding as well as chronic legitimacy deficit of any bounded bodies politic should be exposed. It is more productive to rethink the ways to remedy or mitigate the initial injustices committed toward the excluded from the demos and to legitimize the recomposition of the body politic (demos) via subsequent democratic reconstitution. It is argued that political body can be democratically reconstituted not just during extraordinary but also during ordinary, everyday political moments, when relations between popular sovereignty and human rights are negotiated and contested. The opportunities for these contestations and negotiations are situations of restoration of membership for the old members and recognition of membership to the new members, usually understood as situations addressing the compositional dimension of demos that responds to the question who is the passive member, and where should the external boundaries of the demos be drawn. But there are also situations when political identity can be redefined, especially when collective action is initiated, opportunities when performative dimension of the demos is activated, and which informs us about struggles concerning the internal boundaries of the demos - who can be an active member and how deep is the gap between the demos and the body politic. Performative account of the demos focus on the ways in which the demos demands recognition as the demos and at the same time enacts itself as an emerging body politic. ; Predmet doktorske disertacije je problem konstituisanja političkog tela u demokratskim teorijama. Ovaj se problem u savremenoj analitičkoj političkoj teoriji uobičajeno razmatra kao problem ograničenja demosa, odnosno pitanje kako je moguće demokratski ograničiti demos, dok se u kontinentalnoj političkoj teoriji pre razmatra kao pitanje konstituisanja demosa odnosno kao jedan od paradoksa politike i demokratije. Metodološki se rad priklanja drugom načinu razmatranja ovog pitanja. Zastupam stanovište da je demokratsko konstituisanje demosa logički nerešiv problem te da, umesto pokušaja da se on trajno reši, treba razotkriti paradokse utemeljivačkih priča i hronični nedostatak legitimnosti na ma koji način ograničenog političkog tela. Produktivnije je misliti o načinima da se početne nepravde prema isključenima isprave ili ublaže i da se sastav političkog tela (demosa) naknadno legitimiše demokratskim rekonstituisanjem. Tvrdi se da se političko telo može demokratski rekonstituisati putem ne samo izvanrednih već i svakodnevnih političkih momenata tokom kojih se pregovaraju i osporavaju veze između narodnog suvereniteta i ljudskih prava. Takve situacije osporavanja i pregovaranja su one kada se obnavlja članstvo starim članovima ili priznaje članstvo novim članovima, o čemu se obično misli kao o kompozicionoj dimenziji demosa koja odgovara na pitanje ko je pasivni član, odnosno gde su spoljašnje granice političkog tela. Postoje takođe i situacije redefinisanja političkog identiteta i pokretanja kolektivne akcije što je način da se razmotri performativna dimenzija demosa odnosno unutrašnje granice političkog tela - ko može biti aktivni član i koliki je jaz između demosa i političkog tela. Performativna dimenzija demosa fokusira se na načine na koje demos zahteva priznanje da je demos i istovremeno proizvodi, otelotvoruje sebe, kao političko telo u nastajanju.

AbstractThe paper discusses mathematical properties of the well‐known Bellman‐Johnson 3 × n sequencing problem. Optimal rules for some special cases are developed. For the case min Bi ≥ maxAj we find an optimal sequence of the 2 × n problem for machines B and C and move one item to the front of the sequence to minimize (7); when min Bi ≥ max Cj we solve a 2 × n problem for machines A and B and move one item to the end of the optimal sequence so as to minimize (9).There is also given a sufficient optimality condition for a solution obtained by Johnson's approximate method. This explains why this method so often produces an optimal solution.

Since World War II there has been a growing momentum for interdisciplinary problem-focused research (IDR) performed by teams of disciplinary specialists. Increased efforts to understand the nature and successful management of IDR have led to an exponential increase in, and a growing consolidation of scholarship on the subject. By tracing the evolution of the current body of knowledge on IDR, we can not only determine the sociological and epistemological factors in the production and use of that knowledge but also ascertain the current state of the art in the field.

AbstractThe effectiveness of Johnson's Approximate Method (JAM) for the 3 × n job shop scheduling problems was examined on 1,500 test cases with n ranging from 6 to 50 and with the processing times Ai, Bi, Ci (for item i on machines A, B, C) being uniformly and normally distributed. JAM proved to be quite effective for the case Bi ⩽ max (Ai, Ci) and optimal for Bi, ⩽ min (Ai, Ci).

Address before the Council on foreign relations, New York, N.Y., Jan. 29, 1935.