Innovation-Based Development of the Mineral Resources Sector: Challenges and Prospects. Proceedings of the 11th Russian-German Raw Materials Conference, November 7-8, 2018, Potsdam, Germany
Innovation-Based Development of the Mineral Resources Sector: Challenges and Prospects contains the contributions presented at the XI Russian-German Raw Materials Conference (Potsdam, Germany, 7-8 November 2018). The Russian-German Raw Materials Conference is held within the framework of the “Permanent Russian-German Forum on the Issues of the Use of Raw Materials”, which has as goals to develop new approaches to effectively use energy, mineral and renewable natural resources and to initiate cooperation in the field of sustainability and environmental protection. The contributions cover current trends in the development of raw materials markets and the world economy, the state of the environment and new technologies applied in the sector, effectively responding to modern challenges. The 63 accepted papers are grouped into four main sections:
• Mineral exploration and mining
• Mining services
• Processing of raw materials
Innovation-Based Development of the Mineral Resources Sector: Challenges and Prospects will be of interest to academics and researchers involved in the mineral resources sector, but also to professionals in the public, foreign trade and education fields, and representatives of major corporations and professional associations.
The research work presents an analysis of the educational demands of middle managers of the modern University, as well as the motives of their occurrence. The practical importance of the results of the study/is to solve the problems of management accounting of the effectiveness of professional interactions of managers in the transition to the project activity to obtain additional resources for the development of the educational organization The study of factors and motives of formation of qualification deficits of managers of the University, which contributes to the solution of problems of management accounting efficiency of professional interactions of managers in the transition to the project activity.
In What is Called Thinking?, Heidegger provocatively says that: “science does not think” (WCT 8). Unfortunately, Heidegger does very little to explain this bold claim, or explicitly articulate what he sees as the unthinking aspects of science. With that said, this essay elucidates Heidegger’s controversial assertion by aligning Heidegger’s distinction between Gestelland Gelassenheitwith Kuhn’s distinction between normal and revolutionary science. Briefly, the idea is that the puzzle-solving of normal science, much like the calculative activity that orders modern technology (Gestell), fails to ask what it means for scientific entities to be. However, theparadigm-testing of revolutionary science represents a releasement (Gelassenheit) from the practices and presuppositions of normal science such that it is able to ask about the beingof scientific entities. In short, revolutionary science thinks about the being of entities in a way that normal science does not.
In order to make the connection between Heidegger and Kuhn clear and thereby explain Heidegger’s claim that “science does not think,” I begin this essay with an account of the distinction Heidegger makes between being and entities. I then spell out this distinction and tentatively explicate the meaning of being via an analysis of Kuhn’s distinction between scientific paradigms and the objects we study through them. The basic thought is that Heidegger’s “being” is akin to Kuhn’s “paradigms” insofar as both tell us what it means for a specific entity or object to be. In Section 2, I explain why science does not think about the being of entities. Specifically, I connect Heidegger’s interpretation of scientific explanation and calculation with Kuhn’s account of puzzle-solving in normal science. I then illustrate why the pursuit of problems related to entities precludes questioning the paradigm that presents us with those entities and also leads to the dangers Heidegger sees in modern technology. In Section 3, I compare Heidegger’s interpretation of our releasement from the calculative activities that characterize technology with Kuhn’s account of the paradigm shifts that typify revolutionary science. In doing so, I note that revolutionary science does think about the being of entities, but in Section 4 I indicate a key difference between Heidegger and Kuhn over the extent to which thinking is either externalor internalto the practices of science. As Heidegger sees it, thinking about the being of entities is achieved through a releasementfrom calculative activities. But for Kuhn it is an intense engagementwith the puzzle-solving of normal science that enables a paradigm shift. This suggests Heidegger might be skeptical about science’s ability to think even in the revolutionary case, whereas Kuhn appears to be optimistic about science’s ability to think, generally. Finally, I show that Heidegger may still have some sympathy for Kuhn’s position insofar as Kuhn’s account of anomalies is consistent with Heidegger’s claim that as the dangers of technology grow the potential for being saved grows as well.
The present paper is devoted to the research of controlled queueing models at control of CBSMAP-flow, Controlled Batch Semi-Markov Arrival Process (Kashtanov, Kondrashova 2012). The control is based on the theory of controlled semi-markov processes and used for the system optimization. The control is carried out using the choice of the next batch type.
The functional model of the application of mathematical modeling , reflecting the sequence of solving problems in the design of complex electronic systems . Developed a functional model of information technology to ensure the reliability of complex electronic systems. Showing the basic concept of implementing continuous information support program to ensure the reliability of the calculation of the indicators of reliability of complex electronic systems for the purpose of specifying the requirements of software
This publication presents Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on System Analysis in Engineering and Management (SAEM' 14): best papers of the conference, organized by the St. Petersburg State Polytechnic University and the Southern Federal University, Central Economics and Mathematics Institute (CEMI) RAS and the International Higher Education Academy of Sciences includes articles by leading scientists whose reports were selected conference participants. Chairman of the Organizing Committee President of St. Petersburg State Polytechnic University and Saint-Petersburg Department of International Higher Education Academy of Science, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Y.S. Vasiliev. The co-chairs of the Organizing Committee: Deputy Chairmans of the St. Petersburg departament of International Higher Education Academy of Science, Dr. of Technical Sciences, Professor, Honored Worker of Higher Education of the Russian Federation V.N. Kozlov; Member International Higher Education Academy of Science, Dr. of Economics Sciences, Honored Worker of Higher Education of the Russian Federation V.N.Volkova; Dr. of Economics Sciences, Professor of SFU, Honored Worker of Higher Education of the Russian Federation V.E. Lankin. Organizing Committee Members: Deputy Director of CEMI, corr. Russian Academy of Sciences, Head. Department of System Analysis of the Finance Academy under the Government of the Russian Federation, Dr. of Economics Sciences, Professor G.B. Kleiner, Professor Østfold University College J.-E. Andreassen (Норвегия); Dr. of Technical Sciences, Professor Sciences, Professor Senator Naval Academy in Poland, member of the Polish Academy of Sciences on the organization and management of I.B. Arefiev (Poland); Dr. of Economics Sciences, Professor of the Berlin Institute of Applied Sciences V. Bobrov (Germany); Member IHEAS, МАI and RAEN, Dr. of Technical Sciences, Professor L.S. Bolotova; Member IHEAS, МАI and RAEN, Dr. of Technical Sciences, Professor of SFU G.V. Gorelova; Professor, expert of the European Council for Business Education (ESVE) B. Johnson (United Kingdom); Dr. of Economics Sciences, Professor of Kuban State Agrarian University I.A. Katsko, corr. IHEAS of Economics Sciences, Professor SPbGEU B.L. Kukor; Member IHEAS, Dr. of Technical Sciences, Professor SPbPU Y.I.Lypar; PhD.Adjunct Professor Tampere University of Applied Sciences N. Moritz (Финляндия); Speaker's Biographical Information Department of Mathematics and Statistics Curtin University of Technology V. Rumchev (Австралия); corr. IHEAS? D-r of Technical Sciences, Professor SPbPU A.N. Firsov, Member IHEAS and MAOR, Dr. of Economics Sciences, Professor SPb Institute of Business and Law G.P. Chudesova; Dr. of Economics Sciences, Professo SpbPU V.N. Yrtiev. Scientific secretary corr. IHEAS, PhD. of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor SPbPU S.V. Shirokova, PhD. of Economics Sciences, Associate Professor SPbPU A.V. Loginova.
In 2013, the InternationalConference on Advance Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE) is turning 25. Started in 1989, in these years, the conference has provided a broad forum for researchers working in the area of Information Systems Engineering. To reflect on the work done so far and to examine perspectives of future work, the CAiSE Steering Committee decided to collect a selection of papers published in the conference proceedings in these years and to ask their authors, well-known researchers in the area, to comment on their work and how it developed during the years. CAiSE Proceedings have been published by Springer in the Lecture Notes in Computer Science Series (LNCS) since 1990.
The book provides an overview on the conference from different points of view: a historical analysis on how it developed and its goals over the years, a social network analysis of the positioning of CAiSE in the research community, and future perspectives for the conference in an evolving world.
Computerization as computer technology and Informatization as the information technology of today, are interrelated and determine the priority base of science-intensive technologies of education. However, they are the original component of the science-intensive technologies of education. It is, scientific knowledge in a particular subject area. This article analyzes the problems that require a philosophical and methodological reflection from a position of knowledge-intensive technologies of education.
We live in a world where technology reaches into every aspect of our lives. Technological devices are with us from the minute we wake up until the moment we fall asleep. We trade digital information with a host of individuals at a rate that was inconceivable just a generation ago. Contemporary health researchers and technology experts have begun to identify the symptoms of technology fatigue: a form of anxiety that results from always being available and from the need to constantly engage with our technology. Yet despite the impact technology has on our daily life, relatively little philosophical reflection has gone into explaining what draws us into technology’s embrace.
Beginning in the mid-1930s, Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) turned his attention to the framework in which technological devices are understood. Heidegger was one of the most important thinkers of the 20thcentury and his philosophy of technology is based on the relation between two key concepts: Gestell and Gelassenheit. Gestellis often translated as “enframing” or “positionality” and it indicates the way we frame, position, and ultimately reduce the world to resources for production and consumption. Specifically,Gestell refers to our tendency to make everything, including ourselves, a resource ready to be called on in the service of a technological system. According to Heidegger, reducing the world to readily available resources is dangerous because it undermines our creative engagement with reality, alienates us from ourselves and each other, and leads to the destruction of our habitat. The antidote to this condition is: Gelassenheit. Gelassenheitis translated as “releasement” or “equanimity” and it refers to a disposition that blocks us from imposing our will on things and thus opens us up to alternative ways of relating to reality. In short, Gestell and Gelassenheit stand as opposing ideas in Heidegger’s analysis of technology whereby the releasement characteristic of Gelassenheit counters the dangers of our technological framing of the world via Gestell.
Although there are several important books that address Gestelland Gelassenheit when discussing other themes in Heidegger’s work, this volume offers the first comprehensive and definitive account of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy of technology. It does so by collecting essays from leading Heidegger scholars on key aspects of Heidegger’s thought on techno-science. Some of the central themes addressed in this collection include: the history, development, and defining features of modern technology; the relationship between scientific theories and their technological instantiations; the nature of human agency and the essence of education in the age of technology; and the ethical, political, and environmental impact of our current techno-scientific customs. Of course, presenting a complete account of a book’s content is beyond the scope of any introduction. However, in Section 1 we explain our scholarly aims and practical ambitions in putting together this volume. In Section 2, we describe the development of Heidegger’s philosophy of technology from his early phenomenological work to his later essays on the essence of technology. In Section 3, we offer a slightly more detailed account of Gestell and Gelassenheit. Finally, in Section 4 we provide a short summary of the seventeen essays collected here.
Martin Heidegger is arguably the most influential philosopher of the 20th Century. He was also a card-carrying member of the Nazi Party. Debate over the relation between Heidegger’s thought and his political engagement has raged since Heidegger officially joined the Nazis in 1933. However, the recent publication of Heidegger’s private notebooks offers scholars new and detailed insight into Heidegger’s intellectual development and political commitments in the interwar period. In this essay, I examine Heidegger’s involvement with the Nazis in light of the philosophical account of Western history (Seinsgeschichte) that Heidegger introduces in his 1927 edition of Being and Time, develops in his notebooks and other writings from the 1930s, and finalizes in his lectures on technology in the 1940s. Specifically, I start with a summary of Heidegger’s stated aim in Being and Time, namely, to “raise anew the question of the meaning of being” through a “phenomenological deconstruction of the history of ontology” (BT1/19, 39/63).I then demonstrate that Heidegger’s early enthusiasm for National Socialism was partially based on his belief that the Nazis represented a radical break from the Western tradition that begins with Greek metaphysics and culminates in the environmental degradation and human dislocation in our modern, technologically driven societies. From here, I show that Heidegger came to realize that, far from a break with Western history, National Socialism represented the apotheosis of modern technology. At this point, I also explain how Heidegger’s later critique of technology develops out of his disillusionment with the Nazis, and so amounts to an implicit and occasionally explicit critique of National Socialism. Finally, I object to Heidegger’s philosophical account of the Western tradition by pointing out that his focus on the general trends of history overlooks the concrete suffering of individual human beings, but then I illustrate how this criticism is addressed by one of Heidegger’s most influential students: Emmanuel Levinas.
This proceedings publication is a compilation of selected contributions from the “Third International Conference on the Dynamics of Information Systems” which took place at the University of Florida, Gainesville, February 16–18, 2011. The purpose of this conference was to bring together scientists and engineers from industry, government, and academia in order to exchange new discoveries and results in a broad range of topics relevant to the theory and practice of dynamics of information systems. Dynamics of Information Systems: Mathematical Foundation presents state-of-the art research and is intended for graduate students and researchers interested in some of the most recent discoveries in information theory and dynamical systems. Scientists in other disciplines may also benefit from the applications of new developments to their own area of study.