Hi, Pedro. I think that your and Raquel's work on historic organization of FIS discussion is very important to all FISers. Thank you very much for this (hard) work, and if you need any help, you can count on me :-) Bibliometric studies on FIS list will be part of my PhD research and I hope I can interview FIS members (as I did with Bob - it was an amazing interview!) to add qualitative data to this measurements.
About "collective intelligence", it reminds me Pierre Levy's book "Collective Intelligence: Mankind's Emerging World in Cyberspace" (1997) that explain what is his definition Collective Intelligence and some developments. His article "From social computing to reflexive collective intelligence: The IEML research program" (2010) in "Information Sciences" journal proposes a Information Economy MetaLanguage to work with Collective Intelligence concept. It is a very interesting subject, but unfortunately I didn't have time to read much about. About the crisis on "creative thought and deep interdisciplinary engagement", in my opinion is because science today (as many other things) is always in a hurry. Researches are where the money is. And "money" wants results as fast as possible. But there are good initiatives, like this list and ArXiv for example, that is working against this system. Best, Moisés References: LÉVY, Pierre. Collective Intelligence: Mankind’s Emerging World in Cyberspace. Cambrigde, Mass.: Perseus Books, 1997. LÉVY, Pierre. From social computing to reflexive collective intelligence: The IEML research program. Information Sciences, v. 180, n. 1, p. 71-94, 2010. 2015-07-10 8:30 GMT-03:00 Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>: > Dear Moises, Ken, and FIS colleagues, > > First of all, thanks to you two for chairing the discussion session. Also, > for a different matter, to Raquel del Moral. She has been working with me > in the complete archive of fis messages and recapitulating the whole fis > discussion-sessions celebrated (starting by the the "virtual conference" > long ago, in 1998). It is a big novelty in the fis webpage. Please, have a > glance at: http://fis.sciforum.net/fis-discussion-sessions/ > Hopefully it will allow quite many future bibliometric studies... > > A closer relationship between classical information/library science and a > renewed information science as was attempted in the session is important. > Organizing the stock of accumulated knowledge in this epoch of > multidisciplinarity, of instant data access, of increasing research > complexity, of pervasive big data, of massive innovation, etc. should imply > new thinking styles and a new reflection on the individual mind versus the > aggregate system of collective intelligence. Unfortunately I do not see > much advancement in that matter --even the opposite. The talk about the > "global brain" is superficial at best. The attentional saturation of the > social environment during the last decade is strongly diminishing the > individual capabilities for really creative thought and deep > interdisciplinary engagement (for instance, less and less interesting new > books). The dangers inherent in the "mechanization of knowledge", as was > warning a celebrated essay by Harold Innis (McLuhan's mentor), could become > real in our time. > > So, if the above lamentations have a grain of truth, we have not much > succeeded in the ongoing discussion. If the new mission of library science, > hand to hand with the new information science, should also include the > qualitative thinking on the social and institutional conditions for > advancement of knowledge in its widest sense (humanist too), we have a lot > of pending work to do. I hope not to be sounding pessimistic! I was > motivated by some recent comment of an Indian researcher (Sunita Narain) on > waste management: "the key obstacle is that everyday challenges are not top > priorities for research and innovation. Indian science has always been > fascinated by the 'masculine' agendas of space and genetics, not > reinventing the toilet. Instead, science must meet the needs of poor > people. We need to devise ways to prevent pollution rather than cleaning it > up afterwards. Indian research has to be more humble, nimble and > investigative... India's ambition should be to become front-runner in the > race to save the planet." (Nature 2015, vol. 521, pp:155) > > Best--Pedro > > > Moisés André Nisenbaum wrote: > >> >> Dear FIS Colleagues, >> >> First, I want to thank Pedro and everyone the opportunity to introduce, >> participate and observe the development of debate “THE FOURTH GREAT DOMAIN >> OF SCIENCE: INFORMATIONAL?” >> >> I spent the last days documenting the posts related to this discussion. >> On this basis, I will present some numbers and comments about these rich >> discussions. >> >> >> > > -- > ------------------------------------------------- > Pedro C. Marijuán > Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group > Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud > Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA) > Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X > 50009 Zaragoza, Spain > Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) > pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es > http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ > ------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > -- Moisés André Nisenbaum Doutorando IBICT/UFRJ. Professor. Msc. Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro - IFRJ Campus Maracanã moises.nisenb...@ifrj.edu.br
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
