Elementary fibrations of enriched groupoids

The present paper aims at stressing the importance of the Hofmann–Streicher groupoid model for Martin Löf Type Theory as a link with the first-order equality and its semantics via adjunctions. The groupoid model was introduced by Martin Hofmann in his Ph.D. thesis and later analysed in collaboration with Thomas Streicher. In this paper, after describing an algebraic weak factorisation system $$\mathsf {L, R}$$ on the category $${\cal C}-{\cal Gpd}$$ of $${\cal C}$$ -enriched groupoids, we prove that its fibration of algebras is elementary (in the sense of Lawvere) and use this fact to produce the factorisation of diagonals for $$\mathsf {L, R}$$ needed to interpret identity types.

The formulation of welfare state: the perspective of Maqāṣid al-Sharī‘ah

This paper examines empirical facts of market failure and government failure toimprove people’s welfare; capitalism and neo-liberalism do not provide a spacefor states to implement policies for social justice. With regard to the failure of thewelfare state to bring the citizen to fair welfare, this paper offers the formulationof a welfare state based on Maqa>s}id Al-Shari>‘ah. This study employs Maqa>s}id Al-Shari>‘ah developed by Imam Al-Juwaini, Izzu al-Din bin ‘Abd al-Salam, AbuIshaq al-Shatibi and Al-Tahir Ibn ‘Ashur as the methodological framework.It formulates welfare state of maqa>s}id al-shari>‘ah, which is built through thefulfillment of the three levels of individual needs (citizens) (al-D}aru>ri>yah, alha>ji>yyah and al-tahsi>ni>yah; primary, secondary and suplementary rights), publicneeds (equal distribution; al-ha>jah al-‘ammah), protection or assurance (alismah),and law enforcement (al-fit}rah (order), equality (al-musa>wah), freedom(al-h}urri>yah), magnanimity (al-samh}ah)). The morality-spirituality-religiosity andtranscendence principles develop the formulation. The maqa>s}id al-shari>‘ahshould be the “soul” of every policies and rules or laws. The development ofthe formulation of welfare state based on Maqa>s}id al-Shari>‘ah will build Islamicman/religious man (citizen), who is prosperous spiritually and materially.Artikel ini mengkaji kenyataan empiris mengenai kegagalan pasar(market failure) dan kegagalan negara (government failure) dalam meningkatkankesejahteraan rakyat, kapitalisme dan neo-liberalisme tidak memberikantempat bagi negara untuk melakukan kebijakan demi keadilansosial. Berdasarkan kegagalan negara kesejahteraan menghantarkanwarga negara menuju kesejahteraan yang berkeadilan maka tulisan inimenawarkan formulasi negara kesejahteraaan berdasarkan Maqa>s}id al-Shari>‘ah. Kajian ini mempergunakan Maqa>s}id al-Shari>‘ah sebagai kerangkametodologis yang dikembang oleh Imam Al-Juwaini, Izzu al-Din bin‘Abd al-Salam, Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi dan Al-Tahir Ibn ‘Ashur. Kajian inimemformulasikan negara kesejahteraan berdasarkan maqa>s}id al-shari>‘ahyang dibangun melalui pemenuhan kebutuhan individu (warga negara)berdasarkan tingkatannya; al-D{aru>ri>yah, al-h}a>ji>yyah dan al-tah}si>ni>yah (hakprimer, sekunder dan suplementer), kebutuhan publik, (al-h}u>jah al-‘as}mmah) terealisasi pendistribusian yang merata, adanya proteksi atau jaminan(al-is}mah) dan tegaknya hukum melalui, al-fi>rah (ketertiban), equality(al-musa>wah) kesetaraan, freedom (al-h}uri>yah) kebebesan, magnanimity (alsamh}ah) toleransi. Formulasi tersebut dibangun dengan landasan moral-spritual - religius dan transendental. Menjadikannya “roh” pada setiapkebutuhan dalam membuat kebijakan, peraturan-peraturan atau perundang-undangan. Dengan terwujdnya formulasi negara kesejahteraaanberdasarkan Maqa>s}id al-Shari>‘ah akan melahirkan islamic man/manusiareligius/karakter (warga negara) yang beriman atau pribadi yang memilikikarakter, sejahtera secara batin (spritual) dan lahir (material).

Demokrasi Radikal Menurut Jacques Rancière

Abstrak: Jacques Rancière, pemikir Prancis kelahiran Aljazair (1940-sekarang), konsisten dengan gagasannya tentang kesetaraan bagi setiap orang dan semua orang. Baginya, demokrasi bukanlah bentuk pemerintahan atau tatanan sosial. Kesetaraan yang kontingen dalam tatanan sosial, menurut Rancière, menjadikan demokrasi dapat terjadi kapan saja dan di mana saja, tidak dapat diprediksi. Rancière mengajak kita untuk terbuka pada gangguan-gangguan demos dan kemunculan subyek-subyek baru di masa datang sebagai dinamika dalam tatanan sosial yang tidak perlu ditumpas atau dihambat. Politik demokrasi adalah sebuah perselisihan. Namun perselisihan tersebut bukan tindakan revolusi untuk menghancurkan tatanan sosial yang telah ada menjadi tatanan yang sama sekali baru. Demokrasi adalah subyektivasi politik yang mengganggu tatanan sosial dominan yang dilakukan oleh demos untuk memverifikasi kesetaraan. Kemunculan demos mentransformasi tatanan sosial menjadi bentuk yang berbeda, yang mengakomodasi keberadaan mereka yang tidak terhitung (the wrong, yang salah). Kata-kata Kunci: Demokrasi, kesetaraan, demos, perselisihan, subyektivikasi, yang salah. Abstract: Jacques Rancière, a French philosopher born in Algeria (1940-present), affirms the equality of anyone and everyone. He analyzes the so-called democracy not as a kind of state or social order. Equality which is contingent in the social order, for Rancière, shows that democracy could occurs everytime and everywhere, democracy could not be predicted. Rancière brings us to have an open eye in front of dispute of the demos and the subjectification of any new subjects. This is an inherent and a dynamic of the social order that should not be repressed or stopped. The democratic politics is a dispute. But the dispute is not an act of revolution to destroy the existing social order to create an entirely new order. Democracy is the political subjectification that disrupts the police order by the demos to verify the equality of anyone and everyone. The emergence of the demos transforms the social order into a different form when this order accommodates the existence of the wrong. Keywords: Democracy, equality, demos, dispute, subjectification, the wrong.

KETERTIBAN YANG ADIL VERSUS KETIDAKADILAN: BEBAN SOSIAL-EKONOMI YANG HISTORIS DARI HUKUM

<p><em>This paper is based on a two decade observation on the dilemma of order and justice, leading to an attempt to analyze the social-economic factors underlying the historical roots of injustice. On its course it attempted to take lessons from historically proven axioms provided by certain heavy weight thinkers. While trying to make the best out of those axioms, the analysis could not ignore the hard facts of the daily life of the billions of people suffering from unending injustice in most parts of the world, in the rich and let alone in the poor parts of it. Neither could it escape from criticizing the ubiquitous mess in the justice system, almost universally. Although the overall problem of injustice does not seem to provide much hope for a better life of the people at large, the conclusion of this paper tried to distant away from a pessimistic stance and instead proposed an agenda for those who may concern to be carried out. This paper contains forethoughts of a book in the making regarding basically the same problem. </em></p><p><em> </em></p><p align="right"><strong><em>Keywords</em></strong><em>:</em></p><em>history, authority, rationality, law, order, equality, justice</em>

The theory of the compositions of numbers.—Part II

This investigation was recently suggested to the author by Professor Simon Newcomb. A pack of cards is shuffled and then dealt out in succession, the cards being placed in one heap or pack so long as the numbers of pips on them are in ascending order (equality in the numbers of pips counting as ascending order); when there is a break in ascending order, a fresh heap or pack is commenced, and so on.