The modern origin of fuzzy sets, fuzzy algebra, fuzzy decision making, and "computing with words" is conventionally traced to Lotfi Zadeh's publication in 1965 of his path-breaking refutation of binary set theory. In a sixteen-page article, modestly titled "Fuzzy Sets" and published in the journal Information and Control, Zadeh launched a multi-disciplinary revolution. The start was relatively slow, but momentum gathered quickly. From 1970 to 1979 there were about 500 journal publications with the word fuzzy in the title; from 2000 to 2009 there were more than 35,000. At present, citations to Zadeh's publications are running at a rate of about 1,500-2,000 per year, and this rate continues to rise. Almost all applications of Zadeh's ideas have been in highly technical scientific fields, not in the social sciences. Zadeh was surprised by this development. In a personal note he states: "When I wrote my l965 paper, I expected that fuzzy set theory would be applied primarily in the realm of human sciences. Contrary to my expectation, fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic are applied in the main in physical and engineering sciences." In fact, the first comprehensive examination of fuzzy sets by a social scientist did not appear until 1987, a full twenty-two years after the publication of Zadeh's seminal article, when Michael Smithson, an Australian psychologist, published Fuzzy Set Analysis for Behavioral and Social Sciences.

International Relations (IR) theorists have ceaselessly sought to understand, explain, and transform the experienced reality of international politics. Running through all these attempts is a persistent, yet unquestioned, quest by theorists to develop strategies to eliminate or reduce the antinomies, contradictions, paradoxes, dilemmas, and inconsistencies dogging their approaches. A serious critical assessment of the logic behind these strategies is however lacking. This new work addresses this issue by seeking to reformulate IR theory in an original way. Arfi begins by providing a thorough critique of leading contemporary IR theories, including pragmatism, critical/scientific realism, rationalism, neo-liberal institutionalism and social-constructivism, and then moves on to strengthen and go beyond the valuable contributions of each approach by employing the logic of deconstruction pioneered by Derrida to explicate the consequences of taking into account the dilemmas and inconsistencies of these theories. The book demonstrates that the logic of deconstruction is resourceful and rigorous in its questioning of the presuppositions of prevailing IR approaches, and argues that relying on deconstruction leads to richer and more powerfully insightful pluralist IR theories and is an invaluable resource for taking IR theory beyond currently paralyzing 'wars of paradigms'. Questioning universally accepted presuppositions in existing theories, this book provides an innovative and exciting contribution to the field, and will be of great interest to scholars of international relations theory, critical theory and international relations.

International Relations (IR) theorists have ceaselessly sought to understand, explain, and transform the experienced reality of international politics. Running through all these attempts is a persistent, yet unquestioned, quest by theorists to develop strategies to eliminate or reduce the antinomies, contradictions, paradoxes, dilemmas, and inconsistencies dogging their approaches. A serious critical assessment of the logic behind these strategies is however lacking. This new work addresses this issue by seeking to reformulate IR theory in an original way. Arfi begins by providing a thorough critique of leading contemporary IR theories, including pragmatism, critical/scientific realism, rationalism, neo-liberal institutionalism and social-constructivism, and then moves on to strengthen and go beyond the valuable contributions of each approach by employing the logic of deconstruction pioneered by Derrida to explicate the consequences of taking into account the dilemmas and inconsistencies of these theories. The book demonstrates that the logic of deconstruction is resourceful and rigorous in its questioning of the presuppositions of prevailing IR approaches, and argues that relying on deconstruction leads to richer and more powerfully insightful pluralist IR theories and is an invaluable resource for taking IR theory beyond currently paralyzing 'wars of paradigms'. Questioning universally accepted presuppositions in existing theories, this book provides an innovative and exciting contribution to the field, and will be of great interest to scholars of international relations theory, critical theory and international relations.

The modern origin of fuzzy sets, fuzzy algebra, fuzzy decision making, and "computing with words" is conventionally traced to Lotfi Zadeh's publication in 1965 of his path-breaking refutation of binary set theory. In a sixteen-page article, modestly titled "Fuzzy Sets" and published in the journal Information and Control, Zadeh launched a multi-disciplinary revolution. The start was relatively slow, but momentum gathered quickly. From 1970 to 1979 there were about 500 journal publications with the word fuzzy in the title; from 2000 to 2009 there were more than 35,000. At present, citations to Zadeh's publications are running at a rate of about 1,500-2,000 per year, and this rate continues to rise. Almost all applications of Zadeh's ideas have been in highly technical scientific fields, not in the social sciences. Zadeh was surprised by this development. In a personal note he states: "When I wrote my l965 paper, I expected that fuzzy set theory would be applied primarily in the realm of human sciences. Contrary to my expectation, fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic are applied in the main in physical and engineering sciences." In fact, the first comprehensive examination of fuzzy sets by a social scientist did not appear until 1987, a full twenty-two years after the publication of Zadeh's seminal article, when Michael Smithson, an Australian psychologist, published Fuzzy Set Analysis for Behavioral and Social Sciences.

" A]n important contribution to scholarship.... rigorous and intelligible." Patrick James, University of Missouri

International Change and the Stability of Multiethnic States contributes to the debate over ethnic conflict and cooperation in multiethnic states destabilized by the changing environment of the post Cold War era, proposing a new way of viewing and dealing with these problems. Through an analysis of important moments in the history of two prominent multiethnic societies the former Yugoslavia and Lebanon in which nonstate actors such as communal groups played important roles in events that determined the fates of both states, Badredine Arfi builds a general theory of how the governance of multiethnic societies is transformed under changing international conditions. His work provides new insights on how policymaking can be improved to respond to the challenges posed by the creation, maintenance, transformation, and, when it occurs, collapse of state governance in multiethnic societies. This timely work will interest scholars of international relations and comparative politics, regional specialists, policymakers, and activists."

This book offers a reality check of U.S. global power.The essays in this volume argue that the Bush Doctrine, as outlined in the September 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States, squandered enormous military and economic resources, diminished American power, and undermined America's moral reputation as a defender of democratic values and human rights. The Bush Doctrine misguidedly assumed that the United States was a superpower, a unique unipolar power that could compel others to accede to its preferences for world order. In reality the United States is a formidable but besieged global power, one of a handful of nations that could influence but certainly not dictate world events. The flawed doctrine has led to failed policies that extend America's reach beyond its grasp, most painfully evident in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.Leading scholars and policy analysts from nine countries assess the impact of the Bush Doctrine on world order, explain how the United States reached its current low standing internationally, and propose ways that the country can repair the untold damage wrought by ill-conceived and incompetently executed security and foreign policies. The contributors focus on the principal regions of the world where they have expertise: Asia, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, and Russia.The contributors agree that future security and foreign policies must be informed by the limitations of U.S. economic, cultural, and military power to shape world order to reflect American interests and values. American power and influence will increase only when the United States binds itself to moral norms, legal strictures, and political accords in cooperation with other like-minded states and peoples.