Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"Conventional wisdom--and business school curricula--teaches us that making trade-offs is inevitable when it comes to hard choices. But sometimes, accepting the obvious trade-off just isn't good enough: the choices in front of us don't get us what we need. In those cases, rather than choosing the least worst option, we can use the models in front of us to create a new and better answer. This is integrative thinking. First introduced by Roger Martin in The Opposable Mind, integrative thinking is an approach to problem solving that uses opposing ideas as the basis for innovation. Now, in Creating Great Choices, Martin and fellow Rotman expert Jennifer Riel vividly show how they have refined and enhanced the understanding and practice of integrative thinking through their work teaching the concept and its principles to business and nonprofit executives, MBA students, even kids. Integrative thinking has been embraced by organizations such as Procter & Gamble, Deloitte, Verizon, and the Toronto District School Board--all seeking a replicable, thoughtful approach to creating a \"third and better way\" to make important choices in the face of unacceptable trade-offs. The book includes new stories of successful integrative thinkers that will demystify the process of creative problem solving. It lays out the authors' practical four-step methodology, which can be applied in virtually any context: Articulating opposing models Examining the models Generating possibilities Assessing prototypes Stimulating and practical, Creating Great Choices blends storytelling, theory, and hands-on advice to help any leader or manager facing a tough choice\"-- Provided by publisher

The contemporary global and African food security agenda is heavily dominated by the narrative that food insecurity is primarily a rural phenomenon. This presupposes that food insecurity is a rural predicament requiring a stupendous increase in smallholder production. This agenda is advancing despite the growing evidence in scholarly accounts of rapid urbanisation and the expansion of the likelihood of an urban future for a plethora of Africans. In the context of South Africa, the advent of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) laid bare the extent to which the country’s urban spaces are food insecure. While food insecurity is a universal challenge, in South Africa, it has particularising aspects that are rooted in colonial legacies, which include, among others, spatial and environmental injustices and urbanisation. These threats to food security interact with such factors as markets and access to credit, pricing policies and other factors to threaten food supply. This paper is qualitative in nature and uses content analyses and a combination of both the Marxist theory of conflict and the intersectionality theory as methodological insights used to obtain data. The aim is to analyse the persistent crisis of urban food security, framing it as an enduring consequence of class contradiction inherent in the post-1994 state administration. The context of its consideration is Johannesburg, South Africa. The paper found that urban food insecurity, particularly in South African townships, has increased exponentially over the years, and as a result, this has reproduced the cycle of generational poverty and disenfranchisement among the natives. The paper concludes and recommends that the panacea to urban food insecurity is the recognition of the informal economy in government policy as a key driver of food access for the urban poor.

Information technology is generally considered an enabler of a firm's agility. A typical premise is that greater IT investment enables a firm to be more agile. However, it is not uncommon that IT can also hinder and sometimes even impede organizational agility. We propose and theorize this frequently observed but understudied IT-agility contradiction by which IT may enable or impede agility. We develop the premise that organizations need to develop superior firm-wide IT capability to successfully manage their IT resources to realize agility. We refine the conceptualization and measurement of IT capability as a latent construct reflected in its three dimensions: IT infrastructure capability, IT business spanning capability, and IT proactive stance.We also conceptualize two types of organizational agility: market capitalizing agility and operational adjustment agility. We then conduct a matched-pair field survey of business and information systems executives in 128 organizations to empirically examine the link between a firm's IT capability and agility. Business executives responded to measurement scales of the two types of agility and organizational context variables, and IS executives responded to measurement scales of IT capabilities and IS context variables. The results show a significant positive relationship between IT capability and the two types of organizational agility. We also find a significant positive joint effect of IT capability and IT spending on operational adjustment agility but not on market capitalizing agility. The findings suggest a possible resolution to the contradictory effect of IT on agility: while more IT spending does not lead to greater agility, spending it in such a way as to enhance and foster IT capabilities does. Our study provides initial empirical evidence to better understand essential IT capabilities and their relationship with organizational agility. Our findings provide a number of useful implications for research and managerial practices.

Rodriguez-Pereyra (2013) points to at least six different principles referred to as the principle of contradiction in Leibniz and states: “The texts suggest that on different occasions he used ‘Principle of Contradiction’ [PC] to refer to different principles. This is puzzling, given the subtlety and power of Leibniz’s mind, for it suggests that he did not really distinguish between the different versions of the principle”. Rodriguez-Pereyra himself suggests that the “different principles” are versions of the PC, as they are all principles which exclude true contradiction and serve to ground mathematical and necessary truths but thinks that it needs to be spelled out more clearly how it is possible that differing principles are one principle, without Leibniz taking note of this. The present paper builds on Rodriguez-Pereyra’s and shows that the various formulations of the PC are indeed different because they amount to different logical contents. However, I shed light on their unity and argue that the different logical contents are expressions of one epistemic principle, which I argue is the PC. Rodriguez-Pereyra (2013) souligne au moins six principes différents appelés principe de contradiction chez Leibniz et déclare : « Les textes suggèrent qu’à différentes occasions, il a utilisé le ‹ principe de contradiction › pour faire référence à des principes différents. Cela est déroutant, compte tenu de la subtilité et de la puissance de l’esprit de Leibniz, car cela suppose qu’il n’a pas vraiment fait de distinction entre les différentes versions du principe ». Rodriguez-Pereyra lui-même considère que les « différents principes » sont des versions du PC, car ils sont tous des principes qui excluent la vraie contradiction et servent à fonder des vérités mathématiques et nécessaires, mais il pense qu’il faut énoncer plus clairement comment il est possible que différents principes soient un seul principe, sans que Leibniz ne le thématise explicitement. Le présent article s’appuie sur celui de Rodriguez-Pereyra et montre que les différentes formulations du PC ont des contenus logiques différents. Je mets toutefois en lumière leur unité et je soutiens que les différents contenus logiques sont l’expression d’un seul principe épistémique, qui, selon moi, est le PC. Rodriguez-Pereyra (2013) weist auf mindestens sechs verschiedene Prinzipien hin, die bei Leibniz als Widerspruchsprinzip bezeichnet werden, und stellt fest: „Die Texte legen nahe, dass er den Ausdruck ‚Widerspruchsprinzip‘ bei einigen Gelegenheiten so verwendet, dass er sich auf verschiedene Prinzipien bezieht. Dies ist angesichts der Subtilität und Stärke von Leibniz’ Verstand rätselhaft, denn es legt nahe, dass er nicht wirklich zwischen den verschiedenen Versionen des Prinzips unterschieden hat“. Rodriguez-Pereyra selbst schlägt vor, dass die „verschiedenen Prinzipien“ Versionen des Satzes vom Widerspruch sind, insofern sie alle Prinzipien sind, die einen echten Widerspruch ausschließen und zur Begründung mathematischer und notwendiger Wahrheiten dienen, weist aber darauf hin, dass deutlicher dargelegt werden muss, wie es möglich ist, dass die verschiedenen Prinzipien von Leibniz als ein Prinzip verstanden werden. Der vorliegende Aufsatz baut auf Rodriguez-Pereyras Artikel auf und zeigt, dass die unterschiedlichen Formulierungen des Prinzips vom Widerspruch auf unterschiedliche logische Inhalte hinauslaufen. Ich beleuchte jedoch ihre Einheit und argumentiere, dass die unterschiedlichen logischen Inhalte Ausdruck eines einzigen epistemischen Prinzips sind, welches das Prinzip vom Widerspruch ausmacht.

This book advocates and defends the view that there are true contradictions (dialetheism), a view that has flown in the face of orthodoxy in Western philosophy since Aristotle's time. The book has been at the centre of the controversies surrounding dialetheism ever since the first edition was published in 1987. This text contains the second edition of the book. It expands upon the original in various ways, and also contains the author's reflections on developments over the last two decades.

Visualization plays an essential role in optimizing teaching methods. In the proposed method, the solution of similarity and contradiction in image creation in education is introduced. There is a special connection between two images in the form of a card. Images express a special scientific point, but at the same time, there are similarities and contradictions on both sides of the card. The purpose of this method is to increase the attractiveness, create motivation in the learning process, which helps to strengthen the visual-cognitive skills of students. These cards can be used individually or in groups. The proposed idea can be used not only for teaching, but also for evaluating the students’ learning level. Various test methods are also introduced at the advanced level. According to the cognitive table of Bloom’s theory, with the help of this method, the student’s learning level in the cognitive field can be measured in the middle and upper levels of this pyramid. The experience obtained from several years of implementing this method shows the excellent participation of students. In a survey, proper persistence in the mind and better understanding of scientific materials are among the prominent advantages of the proposed method.

Rodriguez-Pereyra (2013) points to at least six different principles referred to as the principle of contradiction in Leibniz and states: “The texts suggest that on different occasions he used ‘Principle of Contradiction’ [PC] to refer to different principles. This is puzzling, given the subtlety and power of Leibniz’s mind, for it suggests that he did not really distinguish between the different versions of the principle”. Rodriguez-Pereyra himself suggests that the “different principles” are versions of the PC, as they are all principles which exclude true contradiction and serve to ground mathematical and necessary truths but thinks that it needs to be spelled out more clearly how it is possible that differing principles are one principle, without Leibniz taking note of this. The present paper builds on Rodriguez-Pereyra’s and shows that the various formulations of the PC are indeed different because they amount to different logical contents. However, I shed light on their unity and argue that the different logical contents are expressions of one epistemic principle, which I argue is the PC. Rodriguez-Pereyra (2013) souligne au moins six principes différents appelés principe de contradiction chez Leibniz et déclare : « Les textes suggèrent qu’à différentes occasions, il a utilisé le ‹ principe de contradiction › pour faire référence à des principes différents. Cela est déroutant, compte tenu de la subtilité et de la puissance de l’esprit de Leibniz, car cela suppose qu’il n’a pas vraiment fait de distinction entre les différentes versions du principe ». Rodriguez-Pereyra lui-même considère que les « différents principes » sont des versions du PC, car ils sont tous des principes qui excluent la vraie contradiction et servent à fonder des vérités mathématiques et nécessaires, mais il pense qu’il faut énoncer plus clairement comment il est possible que différents principes soient un seul principe, sans que Leibniz ne le thématise explicitement. Le présent article s’appuie sur celui de Rodriguez-Pereyra et montre que les différentes formulations du PC ont des contenus logiques différents. Je mets toutefois en lumière leur unité et je soutiens que les différents contenus logiques sont l’expression d’un seul principe épistémique, qui, selon moi, est le PC. Rodriguez-Pereyra (2013) weist auf mindestens sechs verschiedene Prinzipien hin, die bei Leibniz als Widerspruchsprinzip bezeichnet werden, und stellt fest: „Die Texte legen nahe, dass er den Ausdruck ‚Widerspruchsprinzip‘ bei einigen Gelegenheiten so verwendet, dass er sich auf verschiedene Prinzipien bezieht. Dies ist angesichts der Subtilität und Stärke von Leibniz’ Verstand rätselhaft, denn es legt nahe, dass er nicht wirklich zwischen den verschiedenen Versionen des Prinzips unterschieden hat“. Rodriguez-Pereyra selbst schlägt vor, dass die „verschiedenen Prinzipien“ Versionen des Satzes vom Widerspruch sind, insofern sie alle Prinzipien sind, die einen echten Widerspruch ausschließen und zur Begründung mathematischer und notwendiger Wahrheiten dienen, weist aber darauf hin, dass deutlicher dargelegt werden muss, wie es möglich ist, dass die verschiedenen Prinzipien von Leibniz als ein Prinzip verstanden werden. Der vorliegende Aufsatz baut auf Rodriguez-Pereyras Artikel auf und zeigt, dass die unterschiedlichen Formulierungen des Prinzips vom Widerspruch auf unterschiedliche logische Inhalte hinauslaufen. Ich beleuchte jedoch ihre Einheit und argumentiere, dass die unterschiedlichen logischen Inhalte Ausdruck eines einzigen epistemischen Prinzips sind, welches das Prinzip vom Widerspruch ausmacht.

Afterlives of Endor offers an analysis of the way early modern English literature addressed the period's anxieties about witchcraft and theatricality. What determined whether or not a demonologist imagined a trial as a spectacle? What underlying epistemological constraints governed such choices and what conceptions of witchcraft did these choices reveal? Pairing readings of demonological texts with canonical plays and poetry, Laura Levine examines such questions. Through analyses of manuals and pamphlets about the prosecution of witches-including Reginald Scot's skeptical The Discoverie of Witchcraft (1584), King James VI/I's Daemonologie (1597), and Jean Bodin's De la Demonomanie des Sorciers (1580)-Afterlives of Endor examines the way literary texts such as Shakespeare's The Winter's Tale and The Tempest , Spenser's The Faerie Queene , and Marlowe's Tragicall History of Doctor Faustus address anxieties about witchcraft, illusion, and theatricality. Afterlives of Endor attends to the rhetorical tactics, argumentative investments, and underlying tensions of demonological texts with the scrutiny ordinarily reserved for literary texts.

In the past years we have witnessed Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining becoming increasingly popular topics in Information Retrieval and Web data analysis. With the rapid growth of the user-generated content represented in blogs, wikis and Web forums, such an analysis became a useful tool for mining the Web, since it allowed us to capture sentiments and opinions at a large scale. Opinion retrieval has established itself as an important part of search engines. Ratings, opinion trends and representative opinions enrich the search experience of users when combined with traditional document retrieval, by revealing more insights about a subject. Opinion aggregation over product reviews can be very useful for product marketing and positioning, exposing the customers’ attitude towards a product and its features along different dimensions, such as time, geographical location, and experience. Tracking how opinions or discussions evolve over time can help us identify interesting trends and patterns and better understand the ways that information is propagated in the Internet. In this study, we review the development of Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining during the last years, and also discuss the evolution of a relatively new research direction, namely, Contradiction Analysis. We give an overview of the proposed methods and recent advances in these areas, and we try to layout the future research directions in the field.