As this essay goes we have come to believe that an explanation for the Iraq war cannot be found in either the rhetoric or the claim that it was a legally internationally sanctioned war under international law. This is a theory-testing study where we use a theoretical perspective in political science from the international relations studies; Realism is examined, we want to see if it can better explain why the United States invaded Iraq. The main problem in the essay is to identify the reasons why the Iraqi invasion became a fact. In the C-thesis, we go through the perspectives content in a detailed way and briefly describe its views. We have collected material both about the Iraqi invasion and about the theory we want to test. Based on our pre-understanding of the theories, we interpret the developments in Iraq and try to explain them. We have come to the conclusion that realism is very much relevant to our subject and argues for it well. In realism it is the state that is the main actor and concepts like anarchy, self-help, survival and balance of power can best explain USA:s actions. This essay focuses on the means it took (the bush-doctrine) to legitimize such an act, but the mainspring of this essay is how we can understand the reasoning USA must have had behind the decision to invade Iraq. We believe that a realistic approach is the best way to explain what led the US to invade Iraq and through this perspective we can across chosen concepts from Realism, categorize different events that might have had played a vital role in this matter that are relevant with our theoretic perspective.

<p>Numera Nette Wermeld Enström.</p>

No description available.

This report discusses the IT archetypes "governance strategy" and how it could be linked to the IT benefits at the company. The study is based on IT investments that have taken place in ten banks operating in Sweden today, where the reality was modeled on the basis of a questionnaire survey and an additional interview. The aim was to examine whether it is possible to find any correlation between the governance in the banks and obtained benefits for an IT investments. While the competition is intensifying in most companies there is a greater demand for efficiency in IT. The need for IT solutions is greater than ever and the number of IT investments is increasing significantly in most workplaces today, especially on banks. But even if the investments are increasing in numbers it does not necessarily mean that all types of investments are effective and beneficial to the company. The benefits of IT investments are often difficult to measure, and the calculations become even more complex the larger the organization is. According to the framework Val IT Framework 2.0, from 2008, there was a global study made by Price Waterhouse Coopers in Belgium. The surveys, which were based on the response of 750 IT executives and managers, showed that the importance of IT is increasing and that there is much room for improvements in terms of returns on IT investments. To make it easier finding the underlying structures the study was divided into two parts, one benefit study and one archetype study. The structure of both the studies is based on research done by Peter Weill and Jeanne Ross in the field of IT governance and research in IT benefits by Gunasekaran. The main purpose of this report is to present a new way of thinking - where banks can predict the benefits of an IT investment just by viewing their corporate governance and invest in the most profitable IT investments only. The results of this study shows that there are some relations between received benefits in IT investments on the examined banks and their archetype. Most of the banks have an archetype that is similar to the IT duopoly and investments which generally results in strategic benefits.

This work considers what ontology might be after the deconstruction of arché in Reiner Schürmann's and Giorgio Agamben's thinking. It addresses the question by reading Schürmanns historical deduction of the categories of presencing in his book Heidegger On being Acting: From Principles to Anarchy. This deduction is at the heart of his thought in that it tries to manifest what it means to live the transition from arché to an-arché, from a life under principles and why's, to a life without why, and the principle of anarchy. This transitional thought rests on what he calls the hypothesis of closure of the metaphysical field. The deduction is therefore a question of a relation between the first beginnings end as an other beginning. He shows this by establishing categories that are both conceptual- and sensible form. This reaches its full articulation in what he calls the categories of transition; categories in which the distinction between category and intuition seems to collapse – that are its own gaze or eye, that sees both the past and the future at the same time. This is a question regarding relationality: the transition from a causal relationality to an anarchic relationality, from a substance ontology to relational ontology. What is the relational status of the transition itself and its categories? This question lead to the main one: is the transition between arché and an-arché a relation between the two? The overall purpose is to explore this question in order to open, in the end, a path between him and Agamben. The later has pointed out that the key problem to live truly anarchic is a critique of the ontological relation because language presuppositional structure manifests in it, which takes its “full” form in his work The Use of Bodies. Here, perhaps – which we only can point to – Schürmann's thought can meet Agamben's in the caesura between arché and an-arché. Can anarchy ever be in a position of principle? In the end we will have to point to the notion of oikonomia as an area of further research to understand the question of anarchy between Agamben and Schürmann.

In 2018, when famous dissident professor Jordan Peterson visited Scandinavia he stirred up controversy when penetrating the otherwise relatively intact Swedish thought-bubble. Using J.S Mills principles of free thought to guide us through this Orwellian landscape, I will demonstrate the narrowness of the so-called opinion corridor surrounding Swedish public intellectual life.