Humanities and Social Science

Academic Social Science Studies dergisi yılda altı defa yayın yapan uluslararası hakemli bir dergidir. Academic Social Science Studies dergisinde yayınlanan tüm yazıların, dil, bilim ve hukûki açıdan bütün sorumluluğu yazarlarına, yayın hakları www.jasstudies.com'a aittir. Yayınlanan yazılar yayıncının yazılı izni olmaksızın kısmen veya tamamen herhangi bir şekilde basılamaz, çoğaltılamaz. Yayın Kurulu dergiye gönderilen yazıları yayınlayıp yayınlamamakta serbesttir. Gönderilen yazılar iade edilmez.

Creativity and imagination are the most important ingredients for coping with post-normal times, according to Sardar.This paper looks at the way creativity itself is being transformed in the West, from the individualistic/atomistic view of Modernity towards a more contextual, collaborative, complex approach. It explores the potential and possibilities for this more participatory creativity to help go beyond the ‘‘crisis of the
future,’’and argues that the centrality of creativity must go beyond the mythology of genius and inspiration to inform philosophy, ethics, and action. Philosophical reflection and the imagination of desirable futures can emerge from a creative ethic that stresses the value of generative interactions and contexts that support creativity.

This essay proposes an alternative approach to the literature review, presenting it as a creative process of construction and self-reflection within an ecology of ideas. The transdisciplinary literature review is an opportunity to situate the inquirer in an ecology of ideas, to participate in the discourse, and to become aware of how s/he constructs her or his understanding of this ecology. This article explores how we might approach this process from a perspective of complexity, and addresses some of the key challenges and opportunities. Four main dimensions are considered: (a) inquiry-based rather than discipline-based; (b) integrating rather than eliminating the inquirer from the inquiry; (c) meta-paradigmatic rather than intra-paradigmatic; and (d) applying systems and complex thought rather than reductive/disjunctive thinking.

This essay outlines the characteristics of what I call the ‘totalitarian mindset’. Under certain circumstances, human beings engage in patterns of thinking and behavior that are extremely closed and intolerant of difference and pluralism. These patterns of thinking and behaving lead us towards totalitarian, anti-pluralistic futures. An awareness of how these patterns arise, how individuals and groups can be manipulated through the use of fear, and how totalitarianism plays into the desire in human beings for ‘absolute’ answers and solutions, can be helpful in preventing attempts at manipulation and from the dangers of actively wanting to succumb to totalitarian, simplistic, black-and-white solutions in times of stress and anxiety. I present a broad outline of an agenda for education for a pluralistic future. The lived experience of pluralism is still largely unfamiliar and anxiety inducing, and that the phenomenon is generally not understood, with many myths of purity and racial or cultural superiority still prevalent. Finally, as part of that agenda for education, I stress the importance of creativity as an adaptive capacity, an attitude that allows us to see pluralism as an opportunity for growth and positive change rather than simply conflict.

This work investigates the constitutionality of the power for the creation of new Local Government Areas under the 1999 Constitution in Nigeria. It posits that the purpose of the grant of such power as " quasi-exclusive legislative preserve " to the State is to enable the Local Communities have ease opportunity to push home the demand for the local authorities of their choice as one of the cardinal principles of Federalism. The work equally examines the constitutional basis of the National Assembly in making Consequential Provisions as assent to the constitutional exercise of the power vested in the State and how the National Assembly has exercised this power to veto the valid law of the State. This is what brought the principle of Inchoate in the Supreme Court decided case exposing the obstacle to the creation of new local government areas under the constitution and therefore a basic constitutional issue. Finally, this work argues for constitutional reform in relation to the creation of new local government areas while comparing the Nigerian constitutional procedures with that of other States.

I really didn't enjoy putting this one together. Nevertheless, I suppose it's good to know for informational purposes.

The need to consider closing programs is one of the most challenging situations that an institution of higher learning can face. Nevertheless, external forces sometimes impose this mandate upon us, dictated by circumstances outside of our immediate sphere of influence. Cuts to higher education funding by state legislatures, for example, may threaten our programs, leaving us with no choice but to adapt to emerging financial hardships beyond our control. The evolving nature of society outside of the university also impacts our program offerings as new technologies alter traditional career paths. Nearly everyone would choose for our programs to continue unaltered, yet this is not a decision that rests with us alone. Despite the unwelcome (and even painful) choice to eliminate programs, we can minimize the negative impact of these decisions by taking the following actions. 1. Establish a shared understanding of why program cuts are necessary. a. The mandate for change will likely be given from the top down, with administrators being the first informed of decisions by academic executives, Boards of Regents, or other governmental entities. b. Administrators should make this information transparent to all stakeholders so that everyone can arrive at a shared understanding of present realities. c. The more open the process, the better we are able to understand together why we must move in a different direction than we'd prefer. d. Finances should not be the only motivating factor behind the decision to close a program, even if they're the precipitant cause. Maintaining a focus on institutional mission and the new opportunities that could emerge through the process of implementing change can cast what might otherwise be only negative in a much more positive and productive light. 2. Work collaboratively from the very beginning of the process. a. Both faculty and administrators should take a team approach to dealing with difficult problems. It should never appear that administrators are heavy-handedly imposing their will on the faculty, nor should the faculty rise up in opposition to the administration. Adversarial approaches are counterproductive and can create damage lasting long after the present crisis has passed. b. Instead, we should realize that all decisions impact everyone. The best mindset says, " We're all in this together and we'll work side-by-side to find the best solution with the smallest impact on the fewest individuals possible. " c. Cuts should be made equitably. For example, agreeing to reduce budgets for administration in equal proportion to cuts affecting faculty helps to establish the mindset that everyone is being treated fairly. d. Administrators and faculty possess different spheres of knowledge and information. Administrators may be privy to financial information that faculty don't usually know,

A critique of "The Politics of Cosmology," a thousand-page manuscript by social ecologist and political theorist Murray Bookchin, based on his study of the history of philosophy and his lectures on that topic. It appears on my PM Press blog and my "It Is What It Isn't" blog from Changing Suns Press.