Re: [Fis] There is no Information Science.
Dear FIS colleagues,Thanks toMarcin for his well-thought reinterpretations of the blind men parable. Time ago Iwas concerned about the reactions that the FIS project would provoke amidstclassical information science practitioners (very susceptible blind men type).I was invited to some conferences in the field and could realize that ingeneral the idea of a larger info science was very well received, say the wayengineering minded parties would respond to ongoing unification projects in paralleltheoretical fields. For them it was quite timely, and sensible, in line withadvancements in quantum information science, biological info-revolution, consciousnessstudies, information society, etc. Besides it was seen within the convergence ofnew perspectives needed for data driven research, data mining, network science, and so on. It is quitedifficult, however, articulating a general syllabus for information science –withouta previous consensus in some delicate matters, so often herein discussed. Atthe time being an interesting option could be a “central themes” core accompaniedby a spattering of introductory topics on info disciplines (or subdisciplines).As I said, my experience teaching info history of societies and bioinfo wasquite successful in terms of graduate students. But I did not venture in preparing the centralthemes part…Some posts have already made good suggestions. The real teaching is the "taste of the pudding", we badly need that experience. Finally, away to think on the relationship between the “mother” info science and the “child”recombinatory info subdisciplines would again conduce to something similar to theblind men parable. The problem is the inevitable loop between info conceptionsand disciplinary or philosophical stances. Let me put it in this way: ifinformation is taken as “distinction on the adjacent”, each of the different sciencesbecomes “an artificial ordering of distinctions, involving regimentedperceptions, standardized actions, and logico-formal structures and conceptualizations.”The syllabus discussion may continue more easily through the "distinctional bridge" common to the informational and the sceintific... I think. Best wishes---Pedro - Mensaje original - De: m...@aiu.ac.jp Fecha: Sábado, 17 de Diciembre de 2011, 2:00 pm Asunto: Re: There is no Information Science. A: whhbs...@sina.com, "Pedro C. Marijuan" , fislist > Dear Tian-qing Qiao, > > Thank you for sharing your view with us and for interesting > parable of five blind men and an elephant. However, I read the > moral of the story just the opposite way. > > If we read this allegory with the elephant representing > information, it shows that Information Science with a broad > theory of information is necessary, unless we want to stay in > the position of the blind, who are using only practice, which > necessarily is limited to specific instances. > > We know now that the view of Francis Bacon, who opposed > formulation of any theory which is not strictly a posteriori > result of inductive, purely empirical procedures faulty. Every > experiment or observation involves a priori theoretical > framework involving conceptualization of the problem (Kant) or > more down to earth simple fact that we need theoretical > description of the experimental procedures and equipment. We > know that positivistic idea of "purely observational > statements" is an illusion. > > Moreover, there were many instances of important contributions > to scientific discoveries made by bold theoretical models > anticipating later experimental results. Schroedinger's little > book "What is life?" is a good example. It is his purely > theoretical concept of aperiodic crystals which stimulated > Crick in his later work with Watson on the structure of DNA. > > Thus, we are in the position of the blind men who are > exploring an elephant, i.e. information, who can even measure > it. The actual breakthrough can come only when we have a > theory of information which describes not only its quantity, > but also its structural and dynamical characteristics. > > We can read the story different way, probably closer to your > interpretation of this allegory. The elephant represents the > world, universe, or reality. But, in this case I see exactly > the same moral. We will stay blind, if we do not develop > methods of integration of the pieces of information coming > from practice, from reports of the specific domains of > investigation. Here we have a very clear role of the > development of the theory and methods of integration of > information, which in my opinion in the most important task of > Information Science. It is much more important that the > ability to measure information. > > Thus, no matter how we look at the story of the blind men and > the elephant, it shows that Information Science is of great > importance. Whether it is possible or not to give it shape > similar to ot
[Fis] Fw: There is no Information Science.
Dear Pedro, Dear FIS Colleagues, My thanks and I am sure that of all of us to Pedro for his clear statement of FIS principles in relation to an informational science (IS) syllabus. I would just like to suggest that reference to inter- and transdisciplinarity, in some way, might help to avoid the "artificial ordering of distinctions", by focusing on what the disciplines involved in IS have in common. Inter- and transdisciplinarity are taken quite seriously in Switzerland in teaching and research in general at the university and doctoral levels, with regular conferences at the Institut Kurt Boesch in Sion in the Valais. (Ref.: Le défi de l'inter- et transdisciplinarité. Concepts, méthodes et pratiques innovantes dans l'enseignement et la recherche. 2011. Darbellay, F. and T. Paulsen. Lausanne: Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes. In French and German). Best Season's Greetings, Joseph Dear FIS colleagues, Thanks toMarcin for his well-thought reinterpretations of the blind men parable. Time ago Iwas concerned about the reactions that the FIS project would provoke amidst classical information science practitioners (very susceptible blind men type).I was invited to some conferences in the field and could realize that ingeneral the idea of a larger info science was very well received, say the wayengineering minded parties would respond to ongoing unification projects in paralleltheoretical fields. For them it was quite timely, and sensible, in line withadvancements in quantum information science, biological info-revolution, consciousnessstudies, information society, etc. Besides it was seen within the convergence ofnew perspectives needed for data driven research, data mining, network science, and so on. It is quitedifficult, however, articulating a general syllabus for information science –withouta previous consensus in some delicate matters, so often herein discussed. Atthe time being an interesting option could be a “central themes” core accompaniedby a spattering of introductory topics on info disciplines (or subdisciplines).As I said, my experience teaching info history of societies and bioinfo wasquite successful in terms of graduate students. But I did not venture in preparing the centralthemes part…Some posts have already made good suggestions. The real teaching is the "taste of the pudding", we badly need that experience. Finally, away to think on the relationship between the “mother” info science and the “child”recombinatory info subdisciplines would again conduce to something similar to theblind men parable. The problem is the inevitable loop between info conceptions and disciplinary or philosophical stances. Let me put it in this way: if information is taken as “distinction on the adjacent”, each of the different science sbecomes “an artificial ordering of distinctions, involving regimented perceptions, standardized actions, and logico-formal structures and conceptualizations.”The syllabus discussion may continue more easily through the "distinctional bridge" common to the informational and the scientific... I think. Best wishes ---Pedro - Mensaje original - De: m...@aiu.ac.jp Fecha: Sábado, 17 de Diciembre de 2011, 2:00 pm Asunto: Re: There is no Information Science. A: whhbs...@sina.com, "Pedro C. Marijuan" , fislist > Dear Tian-qing Qiao, > > Thank you for sharing your view with us and for interesting > parable of five blind men and an elephant. However, I read the > moral of the story just the opposite way. > > If we read this allegory with the elephant representing > information, it shows that Information Science with a broad > theory of information is necessary, unless we want to stay in > the position of the blind, who are using only practice, which > necessarily is limited to specific instances. > > We know now that the view of Francis Bacon, who opposed > formulation of any theory which is not strictly a posteriori > result of inductive, purely empirical procedures faulty. Every > experiment or observation involves a priori theoretical > framework involving conceptualization of the problem (Kant) or > more down to earth simple fact that we need theoretical > description of the experimental procedures and equipment. We > know that positivistic idea of "purely observational > statements" is an illusion. > > Moreover, there were many instances of important contributions > to scientific discoveries made by bold theoretical models > anticipating later experimental results. Schroedinger's little > book "What is life?" is a good example. It is his purely > theoretical concept of aperiodic crystals which stimulated > Crick in his later work with Watson on the structure of DNA. > > Thus, we are in the position of the blind men who are > exploring an elephant, i.e. information, who can even measure > it. The actual breakthrough can come only when we have a > theory of information which descr
