Dear FISers, Thanks to Javier, for the beautiful posting. Apart from those personal factors he mentions, I would also include the organization of knowledge itself. The discipline of rhetorics, included within the Trivium, was an important cohesive force governing the relationships between disciplines and stimulating the typically medieval "disputatio" method of knowledge recombination. Richard Lanham (2006) discusses how governing "the economy of attention" is as much important as the correctness of the "logical flows" --and it is rhetorics who is in charge of handling that attentional focus. In the long term, dropping rhetorics was a failure of modern science, and somehow we are paying for it on the poor understanding of inter/multi/pluri/trans/disciplinary processes. If my views on the need of a "tripartite scheme" on information are not too wrong (world, agents, collective observers), they could also be interpreted as the search for a basic consensus on a new/old rhetorics about the development of information science. If a medieval role-model has to be pointed at, I would choose Raimon Lull (Raimundus Lulius) and his "Ars Magna" scheme, mechanically organizing the mixing of knowledge by means of rotating circular boards, that was so influential in Leibniz's approach (as was the "digital" combinatorics of I Ching itself; a very curious coincidence!)
best wishes ---Pedro Francisco Javier García Marco escribió: > Dear FIS colleagues, > > Medieval intellectuals had many positive strengths: > they did believe that they had to search for objective truth; > that complete objectivity is only available to another dimension > (that is, that human knowledge is always imperfect): that we > have to learn from the others (be humble); and that contemplating > the work of God (nature, social life and personal deeds) is > as important, if not more, than doing things. > > Either, they were not so worried about being brilliant, recognized > and honored as individuals as we have become some centuries later. > > Also, they had a high concept not only of reason but also of > work, including manual work. The founder of their religion worked as a > carpenter, and Paul, one of the most influential founders, told very > clearly that those that do not work, do not deserve eating. > And this was not only practical knowledge, present as it is in every > culture, but something included in the rules of all those > monasteries. Of course, corruption was very great, but it was not the > center: it was honoring the virtue. > > All these has advantages and disadvantages, but probably it is the > basis for workable scientific communication, for an open interchange > of ideas as Pedro says. There were also very bad things in those ages, > but they were not stupid people exactly. > > Best wishes, > > Javier García Marco > University of Zaragoza > > > -- ------------------------------------------------- Pedro C. Marijuán Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud Avda. Gómez Laguna, 25, Pl. 11ª 50009 Zaragoza, Spain Telf: 34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) Fax: 34 976 71 5554 pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
