The influence of rebar, protruding from concrete element during casting, on temperature and strength development was analyzed. Test models of size 50 cm x 50 cm x 50 cm were made with and without protruding rebar. The rebar protruding from the sample simulated the conditions of the hardening of elements such as bridge abutments or pylons, which require technological break. Samples were cast in insulated formworks, to create semi-adiabatic conditions for concrete curing, simulating real conditions of curing of mass structures. The research utilized selfconsolidating concrete with two different rapid hardening cements: CEM I 42.5R and CEM I 52.5R, and blastfurnace cement CEM III/A 42.5N. Continuous registration of temperatures in the samples was performed for the first 7 days. Based on the results acquired and compressive strength, the amount and kinetics of the heat given off in the concrete was determined and an evaluation of its strength in conditions simulating actual conditions was performed. The research showed that the difference in temperature between the reinforced and non-reinforced sample was approximately 14.0° C.

Akratic actions are usually defined as intentional actions which conflict with the agent’s best judgement. As both irrational and conscious, actions of that type stand in need of an explanation. In this paper I reconstruct and criticize Donald Davidson’s classical standpoint on the problem of akrasia. I show the disadvantages of Davidsonian conception of practical reasoning and I defend the conception of syllogistic reasoning. I also criticize the theory of intention as unconditional normative judgement. Against Davidson’s view, I argue for the theory of intention as an act of will (not a judgement). According to this theory of intention and practical reasoning, akratic actions should be explained as actions caused by an act of will which conflicts with the best judgement. I propose to interpret the inclination of will to conflict or to follow the best judgement by the theory of habitus.