Democracy - Science topic

Democracy is a formal, technical alternative to tyranny. Although it is frequently attempted, any claim by a tyrant to democratic forms is illegitimate.

Tyrant: an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution. : a usurper of sovereignty. : a ruler who exercises absolute power oppressively or brutally. : one resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power.

(google)

Democracy, in its very original concept, is quite distant of what today is called democracy and the various strange types of it!! What I would make is to recover the deep strategic human values we all need and expect of Democracy. We need to end inequality and foster an integral sustainability on all aspects of our lives, which, a representative democratic election gives, some temporal authorities, through various administrative periods, the responsibility to design ways and strategies to make it possible. Democracy is not a political game to win power to solve particular interests, but the good and wellbeing of everyone, everywhere, whatever the political party is in power.

Whatever the forms of government or governance there will be remain a gap in between the government and governed, now the question is how and to what extent we can minimize the gap to mobilize all in the process of democratization. In this regard, to involve ineligible voters participation to make accountable government may not good enough as the eligible voters participation, in many different democratic societies, can not make their government accountable in true sense. On the other hand, the youth are nowadays participating in different kinds of activities to promote democratic culture in a society without voting in elections. Thus it possibly prove both together or individually might not good enough to democratize the society if the government or governance culture allow them to enter such political institutions or process to promote the democracy.

Education, education, education!

Jean-Paul Gagnon The term "a genetic knowledge of democracy's words" by Petr Specian alludes to the notion of studying the evolution of language, especially the words and concepts connected with democracy, using a genetic method. In this sense, genetic technique refers to the study of how words and concepts evolve through time, similar to how genetic mutations develop in biological creatures over time.

The theory behind Specian's research is that by analyzing the history of language, we may gain a better understanding of how the concept of democracy has evolved through time. For example, we may learn about how various civilizations understood and implemented different types of governance by tracking the origins and changes in the meaning of terms like "democracy" and "republic" throughout history.

Analyzing historical writings, speeches, and other written materials to track the evolution of major concepts and words across time would be part of a genetic approach of words. This might entail researching the use of a given term in various time periods and languages, as well as examining how the meaning of the word has evolved through time.

A genetic approach of words, in this sense, would help us to comprehend the history of democracy by offering a historical perspective on how the notion has been perceived and employed in various countries and cultures. It would also aid in understanding how the meaning of democracy has evolved through time, including how it was perceived in the past, how it is perceived today, and how it may be perceived in the future.

Very True Jean-Paul Gagnon

The best methods to diversify the study of democracy are the use of philosophical phenomenological and hermeneutic analysis as well as modern sociological theories, such as structural functionalism, symbolic interactionism, exchange theory, dramaturgical theory, network theory and post-modernism.

The best way to have a "self-reflexive" theory of democracy is to write the analytical esse of insights in a free form. It has to contain not only "gnoseological" aspects, bet "ontological" and "axiological" (values) as well.

I think, we can have "genuine" democracy, "effective" democracy, and other kinds of democracy, as well as we can have "fascist" totalitarianism, "communist" totalitarianism and - more important nowadays - "digital totalitarianism". All are totalitarianisms and bad for mental and physical health. What is more important, dear Jean-Paul Gagnon, is that "digital totalitarianism" thrives together or under neoliberal democracies too. Can You explain that? And who can explain that? Please, waiting for the argumented answers.

Yes theories can take the form of story telling in one form to make learned appreciate past fruitful leadership event by focus leaders. As well as comparison with others. Though it can be analytical too.

The tyranny of the majority; democracy by quantity is flawed without democracy by quality.

I agree. And I'll add.

They encourage people to write for a very narrow audience that limits the impact of their work.

They create too much power for a limited number of journals that abuse authors, especially the untenured. Those journals abuse their power by giving out R&Rs multiple times for a paper, knowing authors need the pub and will comply, only to reject the paper. A colleague had that happen back-to-back at two FT50 outlets when she was still untenured.

Yes, we can certainly say that ignorance and illiteracy are part of the problem. Education and access to information are essential factors in promoting economic development, and these are both areas that Nigeria is struggling in. Poor infrastructure, inadequate access to healthcare, and government corruption are also major contributors to the lack of progress in Nigeria. These issues all contribute to a feeling of unhappiness among the population, and to a lack of hope for a brighter future. Investing in education and infrastructure, as well as tackling corruption and improving access to healthcare, can all help to improve the level of happiness among Nigerians.

Hi Justin! Thanks very much for your contribution here! :)

How would you go about raising awareness?

The emerging narrative is obviously to domesticate democracy within the context of peculiarities of political systems. Therefore, democracy in such condition should constitute elements such as, ethnicity, religion, economy, language, culture,clanical be structure etc.

She does not present Mouffe's key points adequately. But regardless...the 'battle of values' is not really an explanatorily profitable notion. Interestingly, I think that Mouffe would endorse exactly the notion of 'democracy as an empty signifier' because that's how her ex, Ernesto L., put it in a number of his writings. Personally, I dislike the essays with strong emotional undertones, but it seems that the 'woke culture' is changing fashions quickly.

Can we enhance African chieftaincy to suit the African space? I guess you could say that. But there is a but. Firstly, will chieftaincy benefit the people?

The most debatable problem with modern democracies is pertained to "the separation of powers principle" when the two main branches of a government (legislative and executive) get in the hands of a single political party through two related elections.

The said principle, being one of the most important principles of democracy, gets null in such a situation, and democracy can be considered have fallen into a patitocracy.

Dear Ludo, thank you for taking the time to write.

Keep in mind, in a normal liberal democratic environment based on majority rule and the independent rule of law, power moves from one normal democratic outcome to another normal democratic outcome through a peaceful transfer of power, where the normal democratic outcome is the one that reflect the majority view rule.....If the current normal democratic outcome is not working in the best interest of the majority as it should, then voters can vote with their HEADS AND FEETS and keep electing normal democratic outcomes that actually reflect the best interest of the majority....If somebody lies to you and you have the power to get rid of him/her with your vote, they you vote him/her out at the first opportunity and bring someone else committed to the best interest of the majority. The voter can use happiness to re-elect RESPONSIBLE normal democratic outcomes or to vote out irresponsable ones to bring in a responsible or more responsible one....

If the majority allows unhappiness to lead to natural full complacency or be the victim of effective targeted chaos induced full complacency, then it allows an extreme democratic outcome to win instead of another normal democratic outcome and then the majority rule process will be held hostage by the minority view as the minority view wins the democratic contest....

The minority view is the exism view, with values contrary to the normal democratic thinking and rule of law as it places the best interest of the exism movement over the best interest of the country and places the best interest of the minority over the best interest of the majority.

So Ludo, to understand the direction where informed and independent rational voter discontent should go to ensure the preservation of the best interest of the majority is always the outcome or where they go to lead to the lost of the best interest of the majority you need to think in terms of NORMAL DEMOCRATIC OUTCOMES/NORMAL LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES and EXTREME DEMOCRATIC OUTCOMES/EXTREME LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES, then you can understand how they can compete for power and persist in power as a competition between normal democratic outcome vrs extreme democratic outcome instead of the USUAL normal democratic outcome agains normal democratic outcome.

Luco, do you have a view on the actual question now that you have the context shared above?: What is the necessary and sufficient condition for an exism movement to come to exist under majority rule based liberal democracies?

In terms of general human democratic values, democracy is unique. I think it is possible to divide democracy into West, Middle East and East in terms of public structure and social values.

Traditionalism has hindered the direct implementation of the Western type of democracy in the East. However, when we look at the historical development process of the society, the remains of settlements in the East inform that it has a democracy of its own. There is a distinctive form of democracy in Middle Eastern societies such as Israel, where religion is determinant in social life and public administration.

Another approach might be the democracy of industrial and post-industrial societies, which is reflected in the quality of social relations. The democracy of the information society makes the distinction between east and west meaningless.

Jean-Paul Gagnon Well, we know that democracy is government by the people for the people. Beyond that, I am afraid that Sawards words sound like waffle to me. Different societies have made different decisions as would be expected based on norms and values, as well as power relationships internal to any society. Of course, it is going to mean some things PLURAL. This sounds like an idiotic statement to me. Of course different societies will have different meanings and approaches. Sorry, but this is just some random person trying to make himself sound intellectual and important, in my humble opinion. Politics needs to be more grounded in social science in order to provide any meaningful answers.

Dear Jean-Paul Gagnon, to teach democracy outside school, you have to take your students to participate in different democratic activities of ideal political parties, visit election booths where people are exercising their voting rights in a fair election and join different mock parliamentary sessions organized by different agencies.

They should be given opportunities for viewing documentary film shows of different countries where democracy has taken firm roots.

Moreover, to visit some model institutions as often as possible, where decision-making procedure includes administration, teachers, students and their parents.

Besides this, democracy has to be practiced in the classroom and opinions of the students should be freely voiced and heard. Last but not least, mock sessions should be organized on the exercise of democratic values in the school.

I make a distinction between ideology (what people believe or profess to believe) and culture (the learned habits that determine how people actually behave). The two can find themselves at cross-purposes. Think of an avowed socialist who underdeclares his or her income in a country where tax evasion is common, or a conservative rule-of-law type who pulls strings to evade prosecution for traffic offences in a country where people with connections have that option. As these examples show, culture is a more fundamental determinant of how most people behave than ideology. Seems to me Whitehead's article is more about democratic ideology than democratic culture.

If "democratic culture" means a popular culture that is supportive of democracy and sustains democratic political institutions, I suspect that a key issue may instead be whether the majority of voters are lifetime supporters of their political parties or whether they are willing to vote for a different party, and if so what sort of considerations might induce them to do so. I suspect that corruption and misgovernment are more prevalent in democracies where lifelong party loyalties predominate, even if parties alternate in government, whereas in democracies where people are more willing to switch their vote there is more accountability and corrupt or incompetent ministers are more likely to get sacked. Party-switching by voters encourages greater accountability and cleaner government because it compels governments to respond to scandals in order to minimise the loss of votes.

Good day Jeffrey, if you are thinking inside the box, you may not be able to see the answer to this question, you need to be able to think outside the box to understand the nature and working of exism movements within democratic contest....Just defining exism will not help you much.....I think you need to read more of what is out there....However, the definition used in my publications is below:

All my publications related to this question directly or indirectly have a list of operational concepts relevant to each question.....

In one of the article EXISM is defined as concept No. 30

Now that you have the concept, the context is: There is a necessary and sufficient condition for exism movements to come to power under majority rule based democracy and rule of law when competing in elections; and there is a necessary and sufficient condition for exism movement to lose power when going through reelection. Exism movements like Trumpism, Brexism, Brazilianism and Italianism came to power under the same condition to gain power; and both Brazilianims and Trumpism lost power when seeking reelection under the same condition to lose power, Trumpism fell in 2020 and Brazilianism fell in 2022.

And the question is: Under majority rule based democracies and the rule of law, what is the necessary and sufficient condition for exism movements to lose power?

What do you think?

It is not possible for a democracy not to cause harm, if You want to have no harm to minority, You have to achieve sociocracy.

It could be good to have a non-capitalist democracy, but it is impossible. The only thing remains is to improve capitalism by democracy and other means.

I would like to remind you that as much as what is written, the results on the field are at least as important as what is written. Applications produce results that are at least as important as what is written. After all, if there is an expectation of the perfection of the field on the subject, the results in the field are open to discussion.

Comprehensive supervision and guidance of AI in general and ML in particular, is not practical, or useful. We are an AI technology window of rapid innovation and disruption. Understanding how to cultivate and sustain, global explain-ability, interpretability, safety, trustability... and how to rein in harmful bias, deep fakes, privacy erosion, ... are not yet mature, widely deployed and standardizable (much less fully automatable) disciplines. In short we are not ready for asserting a tight governance model, and if we do so prematurely, we may inhibit the innovations that may actually help address the challenges.

At the same time, a pure bottoms up approach, can do so much damage, that consequent and inevitable legislative and regulatory restriction responses may well inhibit the cultivation and adoption of AI technologies , far too broadly.

I would advocate an intermediate approach that establishes guardrails of accountability, which may be addressed by the innovator, technology incubator and solution provider, in ways that are appropriate to the AI technology/process in question. The accountability should involve transparency and attestation (to design, development, testing, deployment and operational monitoring provisions to address the guardrail guidelines). This seems to be the course embraced within a number of "Responsible"/"Trustable" AI initiatives (see NIST, EU AIA, ...)

Just my perspective

Wasn't it Yul Brynner, who said in the King and I, "Democracy takes many forms. In my country it takes a form called absolute monarchy"?

And C.B. Macpherson, The Real World of Democracy (1964), who would have us believe that African dictatorships were a form of democracy?

Where's Wittgenstein's story on legitimate uses of a term?

I don't see democracy as an ideology. It exists in so many variants, in different countries with radically different systems. It means elections, where people choose their government. it also means accountability to the people -- though this can be achieved without elections too. Wonder if you agree. Thanks, Kishan

Yusuf, if you look at exism movements from the point of view of an paradigm shift from normal democratic outcomes to extreme democratic outcomes you need an outside the box thinking model to solve the problem of the paradigm shift knowledge gap created, you need new concepts/ideas no found in dictionaries that how the growth of knowledge works if you remember thomas kuhn's paradigm evolution loop.

If you know what exism movements are you can point out to the answer without looking at the specific concepts.

What is your view on the answer to the question?

External Interference in Internal matters of the Country.

Both are mechanisms designed to operate institutions. Democracy is conventional because it synchronises, while bureaucracy is administrative due to technicality.

Political abstention has two-fold meanings/alternatives - one is very principal and honest - that You do not have any whom to choose - and You do not participate at all, the other is more practical - that You may choose the best from all bad - that is the one that is slightly better. This one is not an open, but, I think, "secret abstention", which needs to be explored by more "original" scientific research methods.

The failure of researchers to link evidence to policy and practice produces evidence that no one uses, impedes innovation, and leads to mediocre or even detrimental development policies. To help improve the definition, design, and implementation of policy research, researchers should adopt a strategic outcome-oriented approach.

The author of the question should have started with the definition of democracy that he adheres to. Dealing with clear formulations, it is easy to prove the thesis. The trouble is that there is a universally recognized definition of democracy, but it only corresponds to the realities in which its authors exist.

In connection with discussions about such phenomena, I always recall a Russian joke: “A military man and a scientist are traveling by train. The road is long, a conversation began and the scientist told the military man about his activities. The military man listened, and then asked: “Well, yes, I understand that you guys are very smart, but then why don't you walk in formation?"

The political system of Russia has only one drawback: the elite do not understand that from time to time it is necessary to change the party in power (out of two real ones as in the USA or Great Britain, or even more of these in other countries), in 4-8-12 years voters simply forget a lot, and the old, familiar evil does not seem so terrible to them. And many have the illusion that the former ruling political force is better than the current one, and that they even worked on the mistakes.

Dear Aziz Ur Rehman ,

Please find some online course for learning R on Edx and Coursera platforms.

Thanks ~PB

See the The Concept of Representationc by [Hanna_F._Pitkin]

The documents may come from teaching and research institutions or from public or private research centers and NGOs.

https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/973-taxation-aid-and-democracy.pdf

In his “The Productive Anarchy of Scientific Imagination” (2020), Michael Stuart argues that the epistemic power of imagination in the sciences is also to be found in its being productively anarchic. That is, researchers may achieve cognitive advancements by breaking the rules that they (or others) have set for themselves. If we recognize this epistemic value of the imagination, then we should take into account the imaginative efforts with which each individual challenge the rules that guide imaginative projects (such as thought experiments) – in order to evaluate their novel proposals within the social community of researchers. I wrote a paper (forthcoming in the Croatian Journal of Philosophy) on this. Even Paul Feyerabend has written very insightful material on this topic.

More than one party contributed to the creation of ISIS, al-Maliki in Iraq allowed the militants to escape from Iraqi prisons to Syria in 2011, then Assad allowed them to establish a militant organization in which the Free Syrian Army would fight, to relieve pressure on the Syrian government, then the Americans used them to overthrow the al-Maliki government in Iraq in 2014,

Thank you all for your constructive inputs and answers.

There is no possible end to heterogeneity, since circumstances alter cases and the world has grown more heterogeneous with several permutations arising from cultural- association intermixes.

Sadly, even countries that espouse universalistic values like human rights and democracy can apply those values selectively on a particularistic basis, that is to say "we" (defined by citizenship, race or what have you) deserve rights and freedom but "they" do not. This can happen not only if "they" are far away and out of sight, but also if "they" are close by. Think of the US constitution which said it was a self-evident truth that all men were created equal, while counting slaves as equivalent to three fifths of free people for representational purposes.

Liquid democracy is ready to use or apply in the Good Governance issues..

It can be achieved if the administration has become flexible to administer to amend in all possible ways.

Most of the societies hard stricken that could not be applicable to amend these liquid democracy aspects.

It is not only the effect of the Good Governance but also the behaviour and mentality of the stakeholders in the community or society.

The liquid democracy could be successful if the people have greater freedom to express their ideas and opinions openly in the forum's.

Journalism often destabilizes democracy. In the example of media, a contemporary democratic backsliding paradigm is related between state and non-state actors and social actors’ power positions, political identities, and professional practices. The reliable press should be cautious not to internalize a proto-democratic responsibility to represent public attitude in ways that justify attention to mobilized irrationalism. Journalists must recognize the synergy of media with populism during elections. The purpose of anti-media populists is to undermine faith in journalism and other institutions.

Dear Adele,

This journal features numerous research on art and politics. Especially in the Portuguese-speaking world. Regards,

I totally agree with you, there has to be a plan to this. If things like this are ignored many poor people will suffer and this will continuously increase the gap between poor people and the rich ones. Increasing tax amongst rich people is a great idea, but i think the is more that need to be done than increasing their Tax, because these rich people run their companies and businesses according to systems and structures which they built to benefit themselves and sideline poor people and outgrowing young business and entrepreneurs. These systems are not only sidelining poor people but young upcoming businessman/women's are sidelined, these are system built to prevent everyone from entering the mainstream for a long run, only those who work with them will share the wealth . Yes i agree to what you have raised regarding Tax, but understand that there is more to be done than tax, if they could break the systems formed to benefit them into benefiting everyone. The GWT would be a great impact and it will reduce the gap in a massive way. This was an interesting question thank you for raising it, the need to be a discussion about this, thanks

Dear Eldar,

A bit on European welfare state values from 20-th century in our article:

In my opinion it is increasing.

Mr. Mahmoud Moghavvemi

I think it is because they have a very small universe

of understanding or a great intention to profit from

incorrect decisions.

Best regards

Marlúbia

Dear Dariusz,

Interesting question. However, I think, it is more necessary to talk about advantages and how to succeed for social market economy instead of free market economy. Social justice (equity) can and should stand in the one line with economic efficiency and freedom.

fundamental reason behind lack of health facilities, education and basic life needs? Is it political failure, corruption or negligence Val Camacho

Lucio Muñoz H.G. Callaway ,

Lucio Muñoz , I would like to correct your impression, as follows: "If she would have thought that my answer was lacking, she would have said so including why she thought my answer was lacking so I have the change to reply, but she did not say so…

all the three having link between each other.

Gary cane, I am interested sir.

Steven, nobody is accusing anybody here. When you say that an entity has more power than another in the market and that is why there is no equality and freedom, by definition you are not talking about Adam Smith's perfect market...

If you look carefully at the pareto efficient and optimal point/conditions of the perfect traditional market, you can not be there without freedom and equality, but if you assume equality away you can be there only with freedom.

Let's leave it here. I am here to exchange ideas, not to impose ideas.

Respectfully yours;

I fully agree and support the opinions of colleagues Janet Lane, Chinaza Godswill Awuchi. Thank you so much!

People are different..in their capabilities and capabilities..the government can provide a decent living for citizens..but the issue of equality..is not possible..whether we are individuals or governments..if the rich give out even a small group of their money to the poor..it will be possible to achieve solidarity and eliminate the Class, albeit in a simple way...

There is no inherent contradiction between natural resource endowments and democracy, in the sense that oil, for example, need not hinder democracy. That said, democracy is necessary for the good governance of political institutions and good governance in government is the key to sustainable development via processes that promote transparency, openness, predictability, participation, accountability, political legitimacy, freedom of association and participation in the process of governance, an established legal outline based on the rule of law, the independence of judiciary to protect human rights and freedom of information and expression, etc.

Thanks; I agree with you, we need to leave here.

Have a nice evening.

Mohamed

Dear Lucio,

Dear Dariusz,

If You do not analyze in this respect the communist China politically and its capitalism economically nowadays, and Yugoslavian system before 1990-s, which can be characterized as "self-governance socialism" politically and "market socialism" economically, You will lack the main points in Your raised problem. Additionally You need to analyze carefully "the Swedish model" of the seventies in 20-th century with its "functional democratic socialism" politically, Meidner "wage-earners funds" economically and elements which implemented economic efficiency and social justice at the same time (as Saltsjobaden agreement of social dialogue from 1938), etc. Other countries are much less important to analyze in this respect.

In this case, I totally agree with the theory that it is a mechanism of direct democracy; It is the possibility protected in the Constitution, people can present bills, without being popular representatives in their respective bodies

Parliamentary democracies are under pressure around the world. It is shown by the Index of Democracy, published by the British Institute of Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). The report says that less than 5 percent of the world's population lives in 20 countries that, according to the Index, are countries of accurate and complete democracy. When governments do not pursue the policies that voters demand and when voters lose confidence in democracy, then a problem arises." Despite everything, existing democratic institutions have an enormous emancipatory character that must be defended over and over again every day. This is not just about equality but also about collective self-determination, according to which we as a society rationally organize and manage our everyday life. In a globalized world, more and more decisions are made by companies and concerns, not parliaments. These are decisions aimed at privatization, profit, and competition. Democracy as we have it promises things that it cannot fulfill because its area of ​​activity is enormously narrowed.

Characteristic postmodern society information capitalist economy that is, the so-called speculative economy which is imbued with neoliberal ideology whereby most states democratic arranged except the USA where liberal is present politically arranging. A society in which we live it is also post-industrial in which agriculture and industry are losing the role they once had. In fact, not correct to say that these two sectors go out, but the service sector has already gained importance in which it opens a vast number of jobs, while in the previous two we have a considerable reduction of the same. Economic globalization enabled the transfer of production units from developed countries to underdeveloped countries where employees do the same job as their colleagues for 8 to 10 times fewer wages. Globalization processes have affected all world societies, not only society Western Europe and the US but also the rest of the world.

THERE IS NO ELSE !!: Democracy is not a perfect system (nothing human is) ... BUT THE OTHER SYSTEMS ARE MUCH WORSE !!!

A Judge can be a member or politically affiliated in his individual capacity with a political party of his choice as he is having freedom or right to choose his own choice as a citizen

Various interpretations of the causes and roots of violence are thanks to narratives and competing myths (and myths are “strangely impervious to facts”). It is the most challenging task, as it raises questions of accountability, and all parties, of course, see themselves as just. Instead of asking why should be asked what made it possible? Mapping an ideology that lies behind the conflict is a crucial task (at least in the former Yugoslavia region). Experts generally agree that the reconciliation and peacebuilding process should be all levels of society involved. Lederach explicitly states that “peacebuilding must be undertaken simultaneously at many levels of society. At the same time, Bar-On observes that “top-down processes and bottom-up is difficult to reconcile due to the lack of a common language and social perspective.” In fact, in the region of the former Yugoslavia, peacebuilding processes have so far not been initiated from the highest level of decision-makers decisions in governments and parliaments.

What is K-12 education?

George as shown in my pictures, under an independent rule of law system and without effective targeted chaos that induces full true majority complacency, exism movements like Trumpism cannot come to exist, and if they come to exist and when they go into re-election the targeted chaos that once worked is ineffective, they will lose re-election and nothing they can do, but to fade away, as independent courts without proof or evidence of electoral fraud will validate the winner of the contest…..

In 2016 against Hillary Clinton, systematic targeted chaos was effective, trumpism won; in 2020 against Biden, systematic targeted chaos was ineffective, trumpism lost. The dilemma the Trump party has now is how to make targeted chaos be effective again…otherwise; they cannot come into power again as long as there is no full true majority complacency….

Conflict and Peace Building in Divided Societies 1st Edition , Anthony Oberschall

Olá, meu portugues no e o melhor, eu estive no Brazil meio ano, e foi bolsista da CAPES, mais escrever fica complicado para mi agora. Eu vou responder vc em espanol, ta bom?

Entiendo perfectamente su punto de vista sobre seguridad ciudadana y democracia. En relación al tema de vulnerabilidades, estamos trabajado la vulnerabilidad socioeconómica local, y los factores que la inducen a ella, para el diseño de polítias públicas que los mitiguen.

Estamos empleando para ello los mapas conceptuales neutrosóficos y los números neutrosóficos. Ya hemos avanzado en ello, pronto saldrá una publicación al respecto.

Estás haciendo el doctorado, y dónde?. En lo que pueda ayudarte, aquí estoy. Mi correo personal sfortezarojas@gmail.com

Saludos