Context: Due to its grounding in a simplistic core model, mainstream theoretical work in economics is heavily conditioned by a realist epistemic framework that may be viewed as the “paradogma” – sensu Mitterer – of economics. Problem: The contribution delineates theoretical developments on the basis of a realist epistemology and their problem-laden consequences for the economic sciences. The subsequent critical discussion seeks to clarify whether economic theory formation is a suitable field for the application of Mitterer’s non-dualist ideas. Method: In (...) the context of a review of their historical background, the paper will explore the possibilities and limits of an application of Mitterer’s non-dualist argumentation to the economic sciences, and present a diagnosis of compatibility and a characterisation of necessary steps towards amplification. Results: It can be shown that the economic sciences would gain in expert knowledge and applicability by adopting the alternative of non-dualism, whose potential has been little appreciated so far. The solution to the meta-scientific problems caused by the pre-structuring of economics in terms of a realist epistemology seems at hand. To take up this new meta-scientific perspective, however, theoretical progress in both non-dualism and economics is required, particularly by paying more serious attention to the theoretical component of communication. Implications: Non-dualism can certainly be utilised by the economic sciences to induce radical innovations and conceptional revisions involving higher meta-scientific consistency. In future, pragmatic gaps will increasingly have to be filled conceptually in order to develop more highly-reflected economic theory formation and corresponding scientific practice. Hence the main idea is that economic actions are inevitably, but not exclusively, based on communication. Constructivist content: Theoretical approaches embracing epistemic relativism in the economic sciences will be properly assessed and developed further along the lines of a non-dualist conceptual revision on the basis of an ontology-free understanding of reality. (shrink)

In this paper, I would like to present G.E. Moore’s view on Scepticism and certainty with reference to his papers “Defence of common sense” “Proof of an external world” and “Certainty”. In section I following Moore’s “Proof of an External World” the distinction between empirical objects like paper, human hand, shoes and socks and private objects like images in dreams, double images, after images, and toothache have been highlighted. It has been pointed out that according to Moore, no example of (...) private objects in place of “these are my two hands” could have successfully refuted scepticism; and that Moore does follow Kant’s definition of external objects in order to prove the existence of the external world. The second section emphasizes two points; i) the example of these are my two hands is not a frivolous activity and ii) Moore does recognize the point of Descartes’ dream argument at least to the extent that de does recognize that knowing that P is different from Proving that P. In section III Moore’s attribution of certainty to empirical propositions has been highlighted by responding to the remarks made by Wittgenstein and Malcolm against Moore. In Section IV following Moore’s certainty, a logical explanation of Moore’s thesis that contingent propositions can be certain has been carried out. In addition to that an explanation of how Moore has weakened the dream argument by finding it incoherent. Finally, it has been concluded that Moore’s refutation of scepticism is quite successful in so far as scepticism has no place in common sense. (shrink)

Georgians' acquaintance with Islam was with the first Arab raids. From the first Muslim Arab domination, Georgians started to become Muslims with cultural interaction. Islam spread especially in Eastern Georgia during the time of Muslim Arabs, Seljuks and Mongols. The spread of Islam in Western Georgia started with the Ottomans. The Ottoman Empire's contact with Georgia begins with the conquest of Trabzon by Fatih Sultan Mehmed. When the Ottomans contacted the region, the geography of Georgia was divided into small kingdoms. (...) With the conquest of Trabzon, the Georgian border was reached and in 1479, Acaristan, Borcka and Maçahel surroundings joined the Ottoman lands. On the one hand, Sukhumi was captured from the north. Then, continuing to advance in the region, Yavuz Sultan Selim paid tribute to the Kingdom of Güryel and Imeret (Açıkbaş) in 1508 during his governorship of Trabzon. Thus, the Ottoman borders had reached beyond the Black Sea coast into Western Georgia. As a result of the increasing relations around Adjaria, which came under Ottoman rule, Islamization began to spread rapidly among the people. Contrary to what is claimed, the spread of Islam in the region did not spread from the ruling strata to the lower, but from the popular strata to the ruling strata. This process was surprisingly fast. In the process of Islamization, many mosques, masjids and schools were built in Adjara, especially with the help of the people. The foundations operating in the region and the mosques and masjids serving under them show that, contrary to the claims of Russian and Georgian historians, Islamization took place rapidly at the beginning of the 17th century in Adjara. In this process, many mosques, masjids and schools were built in the region. In this research, based on the numerous Hurufat records belonging to Adjara, Batumi, Gönye, Çürüksu and Maçahel, the Islamization process will be evaluated by making a social reading with the data obtained from the religious structures established in the rural settlements of the Adjara geography and their officials. Evaluations were made on the Islamization process in Adjara by making a social reading. (shrink)