Re: SV: Foundations of Information Science

Dear Birger,

your point is important. I will have to let it partly unswered now as I am
leaving for vacations. This was exactly what I tried to say when I
rised the question of analogy, equivocity or synonymity concerning
the use of the information concept in different fields. I can
understand the use of a 'general concept of information' in the sense
we have been using the concept of _causa formalis_ and indeed the
concept of _form_ in philosophy (metaphysics). The concept of form
was use for instance to say: the soul is the form of the body, and:
the form of this wood is a chair. The peculiarity of the FIS-approach
is the evolutionary approach. With qualitative different levels of
reality with have also qualitative different information concepts
related to phenomena that could not be forseen from the former level.
In other words, we have to take always the specific parameters of the
phenoma we study whe we talk about information as a domain-related
concept, but we can take this concept in the sense of the _causa
formalis_. Is this a better way of thinking? Maybe.
Concerning LIS (Library and Information Science) we have indeed to
introduce specific differences as we have to do with actors and
observers capable of language. I think Luhmann's difference between
_Mitteilung_ (communication) and _Information_ (and _Verstehen_
understanding) is a useful paradigm. We have being dealing with with
problem of understanding (hermeneutics) of 'Information' but not
being much aware that there must be something like an offert
(_Mitteilung_) out of which the system can create a new
understanding. The concept of _Mitteilung_ was, ironically, a basic
idea of the processes done by _Hermes_ as the god who brought the
messages, announcing them (he was also the god of commerce and thief:
all this is part of our joy, isn't it?!)
With kind regards
Rafael

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 12:56:05 +0100 (MET)
Reply-to: fis@listas.unizar.es
From: Hj�rland Birger <BH@db.dk>
To: Multiple recipients of list <fis@listas.unizar.es>
Subject: SV: Foundations of Information Science

Dear Rafael (and discussion group),

I could not quite follow your answer about the human versus the physical
information concept, and Ill try to reformulate my question.

First, we are a group discussing FIS. In this group I know that Soren is
also connected to the LIS field, and that you have published
"Hermeneutic der Fachinformation" which I also regard as connected to
the LIS field. But most other people in the LIS field are not members of
this group, but have a lot of other journals, seminars, conferences, and
so on. And: Most members of this group may understand the concept
"information science" in quite another way than I do. So: What do we
mean by information science, and consequently: what do we mean by
information? Who have the authority to define these concepts?

Secondly, F. Machlup (1968) in the book "The study of information.
Interdisciplinary messages" claimed, that the concept of information
always has a human informant. Somebody is informing someone about
something. Information in the sense "DNA contains information about
individuals" is only information in a metaphorical sense (and should
thus be written in " " - as you told in your first answer). F. Machlup
is one opinion (or theory) about the concept of information. For my
purpose, I see a dilemma in adopting F.Machlup's view. The positive side
is that it helps delimit the object of information science. The negative
side is, that it does not allow studies comparing users utilization of
"texts" versus natural information sources (like DNA).

Many in this group may say, that they are not interested in limiting IS
to documents, texts, or what information professionals do in electronis
databases. They are interested in a much broader concept: everything
(physical, biological or mental) , that can inform everything else. If
this is the case, let us use a little time to discuss, what the
implications of the claim of such a science might be.

 
kind regards,
Birger

 
Received on Wed Dec 17 17:24:03 1997