Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Dear Gordana, Marcin and FIS Colleagues, I think we all talk about a new interdisciplinary area, already called: “Intelligence Science” Please see: http://www.intsci.ac.cn/en/index.html Maybe it is good to name our summer school: “Foundations of Intelligence Science” Please comment this. Friendly regards Krassimir From: Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 8:38 PM To: Joseph Brenner Cc: m...@aiu.ac.jp ; Krassimir Markov Subject: RE: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Joseph, Now I have no right to post to the list, but I anyway want to say that I of course agree with you, and also that Loet made a good practical point. We talk about two different things and I believe it could be useful to make this distinction as clear as possible. If we (FIS = Foundations of Information Science) are something different from what is called “Information Science” and funded, supported by 40 journals etc. we must be able to show definitely the distinction and why this is important. It also seems to me that what Marcin and Krassimir say is important, as we (FIS) see this synthetic potential to connect different seemingly disparate fields like 1. Nature 2. Living organisms 3. Society That which “Information Science” is not interested in. This is what it is about according to Bertram C. Brookes: The foundations of information science Part I. Philosophical aspects It is first argued that a niche for information science, unclaimed by any other discipline, can be found by admitting the near-autonomy of Popper's World III - the world of objective knowledge. The task of information science can then be defined as the exploration of this world of objective knowledge which is an extension of, but is distinct from, the world of documentation and librarianship. The Popperian ontology then has to be extended to admit the concept of information and its relation to subjective and objective know ledge. The spaces of Popper's three worlds are then con sidered. It is argued that cognitive and physical spaces are not identical and that this lack of identity creates problems for the proper quantification of information phenomena. http://jis.sagepub.com/content/2/3-4/125.short So this information is about human knowledge, as Marcin says. But that is not the only or even the main interest of FIS. Maybe “Information Science” is an already established name and maybe we have no chance to change it given existing structures of research communities. But if we would insist that we work on the foundations of information which underlie all information (be it in inanimate nature, living beings or societies) that may make good practical sense. “Foundations of Information” (and not “Foundations of Information Science”!) seems to be still free. Pragmatically, I would insist that what we do is not Information science but Foundations of Information. Of course, one may expect confusions again, but I would start from placing all those different fields in some boxes and say that we have a box of our own that no one else dealing with information (in scientific way) have covered so far. And I would insist on this synthetic capacity of information as FIS discusses it, which Marcin already pointed out. Best, Gordana PS Krassimir, I think summer school is right idea and it would be good if discussion can help to understand what to present. @bluewin.ch] Sent: den 4 december 2011 16:19 To: Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic; Loet Leydesdorff Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Gordana and Loet, Ref.: Cat, Jordi. 2007. The Unity of Science. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. I think you are being too defensive vis à vis the conventional idea of science. The authority of people who have decided to what information science must be limited may be open to criticism as reductionist, and there are views (see attached) that emphasize epistemological and ontological pluralism. As Cat says, contra epistemological monism, there is no single methodology that supports a single criterion of scientificity, nor a universal domain of its applicability. To keep the concept of information science as broad as possible, however, implies a great deal of individual responsibility to insure high intellectual standards, in or out of the mainstream. The definition of any science should be determined by these and not by what is funded. Cheers, Joseph - Original Message - From: Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic To: Loet Leydesdorff Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 10:08 PM Subject: Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Loet, I think you made an important point. It is really a problem if we use the same term “Information Science” for different things. What “Information Science” in the Web-of-Science's
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
And it could feature in 'Science for Non-Majors' courses as well. STAN On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Guy A Hoelzer hoel...@unr.edu wrote: Hi All, I agree with those who are suggesting that Information Science makes sense as a widely useful way to think about different scientific disciplines even if we don't have a strong consensus on how to define 'information'. I think there is enough coherence among views of 'information' to underpin the unity and universality of the approach. Perhaps Information Science is less a discipline of its own and more of a common approach to understanding that can be applied across disciplines. While I can imagine good courses focusing on Information Science, it might be most productive to include a common framework for information-based models/viewpoints across the curriculum. Guy Hoelzer ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Saturday, December 3, 2011, 8:43:47 PM, Gavin wrote: I was reading Richard Dawkins book “the greatest show on earth” and almost fell over backwards when I read his comments about life and information. He says the only difference between living matter and non living matter is information. That would be the most conjectural statement I have ever read. There is not one scrap of evidence or test or mathematical model to prove this statement. Don't you find it strange to think that such a successful and prominent scientist, recipient of many honourary doctorates and other awards* and former Professor of the Public Understanding of Science, would take such a position? Is it not much more probable, a much more conservative hypothesis, that Dawkins means something different by information than you do? I'd suggest that, if people want to promote information science, Dawkins is someone they should be following. He's probably done more for public recognition of the place of information in science than anyone else has or is likely to do in the near future. Though Stephen Hawking, with his work on the black hole information paradox, should not be neglected. (I wrote to Dawkins in the early nineties suggesting that life could be defined as the survival of information. I'd love to say that he got the idea from me, but in fact he replied saying that it was true, but obvious! I have the handwritten letter (actually my own letter returned with his notes in the margin) carefully stored because I think some day it might be valuable!) * See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins#Awards_and_recognition -- Robin Faichney http://www.robinfaichney.org/ ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Dear Marcin, You are quite right: Your Theory is absolutely correct ! As well as the Theory of Mark, of course as main, and as all others, at the first place - the Theory of Shannon ! Every theory represents any specific point of view and from its point of view it is correct. What we have to do is to agree that: 1. The variety is not bad but very stimulating for reasoning, and 2. Independence is absolutely needed for growing our knowledge and developing the science. During my work on information theory I found at least three areas of information phenomena (if you remember my presentation at GIT in Varna): 1. Nature 2. Living organisms 3. Society All they have one common occurrence - reflection. This way it is clear that information has to investigated in correspondence of it. The education has to be turned toward this common phenomena, which had been recognized by the ancient philosophers. Friendly regards Krassimir -Original Message- From: m...@aiu.ac.jp Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 12:57 PM To: fis Subject: Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Colleagues: Thank you for many interesting contributions in the first day of the discussion. I will try to answer in one entry to three postings from Stan, Loet, and Steven. 1. Specialization in Education (Answer to Stan) There was a period of overwhelming tendency to increase specialization of education. However, the ideals of Liberal Arts Education are coming back. I can give you example of Japan, but I know that it's a global phenomenon. When we opened our university seven years ago it was just a beginning of the return. Our university has its Japanese name International Liberal Arts University (kokusai kyoyou daigaku - but kyoyou is based on Japanese tradition of personality cultivation, not European university tradition) and was designed to develop intellectual autonomy and the ability to learn rather than to specialize in any particular subject. This was the selling point which in short time gave us one of top ten (or top five) ratings among more than 300 universities in Japan. Now, all leading universities in Japan declare this style of educational philosophy. Many American universities have been faithful to the ideal of what is called there Liberal Education which was interpreted in various ways, but was always opposed to excessive specialization. In all variety of educational philosophies of Liberal Arts, there is a recognition of the need for the integration of curricula and for the crossing disciplinary borders. This creates a niche for Information Science to develop as a domain integrating different parts of the curriculum. 2. Reinventing of a Wheel (Answer to Loet) I agree with Gordana, that there are ways to find place for what FIS is about in curriculum. Here is a related, but little bit different issue. There are already some routines in using terms related to information. Information Theory is typically understood as mathematical theory initiated by Shannon, which as already observed by Carnap and Bar-Hillel in 1952 does not say much about information, but about its transmission. Information Science as Loet pointed out in the States is associated quite commonly with Library Science, but actually is more about knowledge management (it's my opinion). For quite long time American journals related to library associations were the only places where you could publish non- mathematical articles about general concept of information. No wonder that Library Science in 1990's inherited title for representing all studies of information. In Japan, Information Science is considered a different name for Computer Science. There is no category in Japanese Ministry of Education system where you can apply for grant to do research in Information Science. You have to use category basically meaning computer science. Now, we can think about using different name for the discipline (Information Studies), or we can try to promote the view that Information Science is broader than it is usually recognized. A generic course in Information Science for all students (within General Education, or in Liberal Arts curriculum) could serve this role to propagate the view that study of information includes many different perspectives on the information phenomena, and that it requires a broad, uniting philosophical reflection on information. 3. Do we know what we are talking about? (Answer to Steven) Sometimes I doubt it, when I read FIS discussions. Of course, I am joking. The unity to all disciplines are given by their philosophy and their methods, not by the definitions of the concepts involved. I am a mathematician and theoretical physicist. I do not know two physicists who would share exactly the same definitions of all concepts. Even more, I do not know two physicists who would agree what exactly physics is. I do not see any problem in discussing ten different concepts of information, as long as there is a common
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Dear Gordana and Loet, Ref.: Cat, Jordi. 2007. The Unity of Science. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. I think you are being too defensive vis à vis the conventional idea of science. The authority of people who have decided to what information science must be limited may be open to criticism as reductionist, and there are views (see attached) that emphasize epistemological and ontological pluralism. As Cat says, contra epistemological monism, there is no single methodology that supports a single criterion of scientificity, nor a universal domain of its applicability. To keep the concept of information science as broad as possible, however, implies a great deal of individual responsibility to insure high intellectual standards, in or out of the mainstream. The definition of any science should be determined by these and not by what is funded. Cheers, Joseph - Original Message - From: Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic To: Loet Leydesdorff Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 10:08 PM Subject: Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Loet, I think you made an important point. It is really a problem if we use the same term Information Science for different things. What Information Science in the Web-of-Science's Science Citation Index journals is about is something different from what we thought of. Science in their case consists in systematization, description etc. - a conventional idea of science about already existing artifacts and related phenomena addressed by already established methods. That is why the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ (which is close to what we discuss within FIS) is not titled Handbook on the Philosophy of Science of Information. Maybe the field we have in mind is just Information or Foundations of Information (that is how Brian Cantwell Smith calls it)? Maybe that is why the journal Information is not in the Web-of-Science's Science Citation Index. Because we discuss things that are not mainstream and already existing. However, this does not prevent us from trying to introduce into curricula some basic knowledge that already is established in Foundations of Information. In the similar way as it is introduced in the HPI, even though many things are still under development. Best, Gordana From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff Sent: den 3 december 2011 18:08 To: m...@aiu.ac.jp; 'PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ'; fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear colleagues, The category of Information and Library Science contains 40+ scholarly journals in the Web-of-Science's Science Citation Index. Of these at least 10 can be identified as Information Science. The lead journal is the Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology. May universities have special schools for library and information science (LIS). This is different from our discussions at this list about information theory. Nevertheless, there is a problem with reinventing a wheel. J Best wishes, Loet Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR), Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam. Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-842239111 l...@leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ ; http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJhl=en -Original Message- From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of m...@aiu.ac.jp Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 1:24 PM To: PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ; fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Colleagues: There are some questions which periodically return to FIS discussions without conclusive answers. For instance: What is information? However, the lack of consensus regarding central concept is not an obstacle in the development of Information Science. There is no commonly accepted answer to the question What is life? But, this does not threaten the identity of Biology. Information Science has not yet achieved a status of a commonly recognized discipline. It is frequently confused with Computer Science, because of the term Informatics which in Europe denotes what in the US is called Computing, or with Library Science and sometimes even with Philosophy of Information, as visible from the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ where philosophy and science interleave on many levels. Information Science will never receive recognition without an organized effort of research community to introduce its philosophy, goals, methods
[Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Dear Colleagues: There are some questions which periodically return to FIS discussions without conclusive answers. For instance: What is information? However, the lack of consensus regarding central concept is not an obstacle in the development of Information Science. There is no commonly accepted answer to the question What is life? But, this does not threaten the identity of Biology. Information Science has not yet achieved a status of a commonly recognized discipline. It is frequently confused with Computer Science, because of the term Informatics which in Europe denotes what in the US is called Computing, or with Library Science and sometimes even with Philosophy of Information, as visible from the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ where philosophy and science interleave on many levels. Information Science will never receive recognition without an organized effort of research community to introduce its philosophy, goals, methods, and achievements to the general audience. Books and articles popularizing the theme of information as a subject of independent study do not have big enough circulation to be sufficient in establishing an identity of the discipline. The only effective way is to introduce Information Science as a subject of education at the college level for students who do not necessarily want to specialize in this direction. Certainly, introduction of a new subject to curriculum is not easy, but it is possible. After all, Information Science is a perfect tool for integration of curriculum, especially in the context of Liberal Arts education. Which other concept, if not information, can be applied in all possible contexts of education? Now, the question is whether we are ready to come out with a syllabus for such a course acceptable for all of us, those who are involved in the subject, and those who aren't, but participate in the development of curricula. Can we overcome differences between our views on the definition of information, on the relationship of information understood in a general way to its particular manifestations in other disciplines? Since the course (or courses) should present an identity of the discipline of Information Science, it is very important that we are convinced about the authentic existence of a large enough common ground. Can we develop a map of this territory? Can we pool resources to establish foundations for a standard, Information Science curriculum? Marcin and Gordana Marcin J. Schroeder, Ph.D. Professor and Dean of Academic Affairs Akita International University Akita, Japan m...@aiu.ac.jp Gordana Dodig Crnkovic, Associate Professor Head of the Computer Science and Networks Department School of Innovation, Design and Engineering Mälardalen University Sweden http://www.mrtc.mdh.se/~gdc/ Organizer of the Symposium on Natural/Unconventional Computing, the Turing Centenary World Congress of AISB/IACAP https://sites.google.com/site/naturalcomputingaisbiacap2012 ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Regarding: Information Science is a perfect tool for integration of curriculum, especially in the context of Liberal Arts education. Which other concept, if not information, can be applied in all possible contexts of education? I would point out that there have been two previous disciplines that have attempted this reasonable goal -- systems science and semiotics. Neither one ever became a major program except in one or two universities where major players worked. Our culture rewards specializations much more than general applications. STAN On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 7:23 AM, m...@aiu.ac.jp wrote: Dear Colleagues: There are some questions which periodically return to FIS discussions without conclusive answers. For instance: What is information? However, the lack of consensus regarding central concept is not an obstacle in the development of Information Science. There is no commonly accepted answer to the question What is life? But, this does not threaten the identity of Biology. Information Science has not yet achieved a status of a commonly recognized discipline. It is frequently confused with Computer Science, because of the term Informatics which in Europe denotes what in the US is called Computing, or with Library Science and sometimes even with Philosophy of Information, as visible from the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ where philosophy and science interleave on many levels. Information Science will never receive recognition without an organized effort of research community to introduce its philosophy, goals, methods, and achievements to the general audience. Books and articles popularizing the theme of information as a subject of independent study do not have big enough circulation to be sufficient in establishing an identity of the discipline. The only effective way is to introduce Information Science as a subject of education at the college level for students who do not necessarily want to specialize in this direction. Certainly, introduction of a new subject to curriculum is not easy, but it is possible. After all, Information Science is a perfect tool for integration of curriculum, especially in the context of Liberal Arts education. Which other concept, if not information, can be applied in all possible contexts of education? Now, the question is whether we are ready to come out with a syllabus for such a course acceptable for all of us, those who are involved in the subject, and those who aren't, but participate in the development of curricula. Can we overcome differences between our views on the definition of information, on the relationship of information understood in a general way to its particular manifestations in other disciplines? Since the course (or courses) should present an identity of the discipline of Information Science, it is very important that we are convinced about the authentic existence of a large enough common ground. Can we develop a map of this territory? Can we pool resources to establish foundations for a standard, Information Science curriculum? Marcin and Gordana Marcin J. Schroeder, Ph.D. Professor and Dean of Academic Affairs Akita International University Akita, Japan m...@aiu.ac.jp Gordana Dodig Crnkovic, Associate Professor Head of the Computer Science and Networks Department School of Innovation, Design and Engineering Mälardalen University Sweden http://www.mrtc.mdh.se/~gdc/ Organizer of the Symposium on Natural/Unconventional Computing, the Turing Centenary World Congress of AISB/IACAP https://sites.google.com/site/naturalcomputingaisbiacap2012 ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Dear Marcin, Gordana, and FIS colleagues, It is impossible for me not to answer of such very important and, I think, on time proposal. What we have to do? Of course, to establish common paradigm !?! The great problem here is that every author stay on his own position and do not accept the others. Well, I hope this is temporally (till corresponded persons pas away) but it is not so short period. The decision is coming himself: We have to start not with building common paradigm accepted all over the world, but with writing and teaching History of information Science and Theories, where most popular authors may be presented starting from the ancient centuries. Such surveys are available in many monographs, for instance Mark made very nice one. Greetings to Gordana, Mark and other colleagues for the new book INFORMATION AND COMPUTATION ! Handbook on the Philosophy of Information is another example. *** At this point I want to stop this explanation and to congratulate Pedro for his new very important position! Dear Pedro, please receive my greetings for your best work, which is now recognized by electing you as Scientific Director of your Institute ! *** The idea of Pedro to organize Summer School of FIS is very appropriate. Let start this way. Varna is nice place for such event. In Spain, during the NIT 2011, we had discussed it but we had no possibilities to start advertising this idea. Now is the right time. Following proposition of Pedro we have to establish a lecturers' group, which will present main areas and theories of Information Science. Please see the preliminary variant of ITA 2012 First Call given at: http://www.ithea.org/fis/ITA2012-cfp1.pdf In the time table we reserve five days for GIT and Summer School on FIS. ( The Summer School on FIS may occupy more days than GIT conference, i.e from June 25 until June 29, 2012. It depends of quantity of presentations. ) Who has possibility to participate and what will he/she present ? Dear members of PC of GIT Int.Conf., Please help us to prepare a good program for the Summer School on FIS and to have as more participants as possible ! Dear Colleagues from FIS, Please be invited to take part as lecturers and/or participants is this very important and, I hope, pleasant for everybody, event ! Friendly regards Krassimir -Original Message- From: m...@aiu.ac.jp Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 2:23 PM To: PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ ; fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Colleagues: There are some questions which periodically return to FIS discussions without conclusive answers. For instance: What is information? However, the lack of consensus regarding central concept is not an obstacle in the development of Information Science. There is no commonly accepted answer to the question What is life? But, this does not threaten the identity of Biology. Information Science has not yet achieved a status of a commonly recognized discipline. It is frequently confused with Computer Science, because of the term Informatics which in Europe denotes what in the US is called Computing, or with Library Science and sometimes even with Philosophy of Information, as visible from the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ where philosophy and science interleave on many levels. Information Science will never receive recognition without an organized effort of research community to introduce its philosophy, goals, methods, and achievements to the general audience. Books and articles popularizing the theme of information as a subject of independent study do not have big enough circulation to be sufficient in establishing an identity of the discipline. The only effective way is to introduce Information Science as a subject of education at the college level for students who do not necessarily want to specialize in this direction. Certainly, introduction of a new subject to curriculum is not easy, but it is possible. After all, Information Science is a perfect tool for integration of curriculum, especially in the context of Liberal Arts education. Which other concept, if not information, can be applied in all possible contexts of education? Now, the question is whether we are ready to come out with a syllabus for such a course acceptable for all of us, those who are involved in the subject, and those who aren't, but participate in the development of curricula. Can we overcome differences between our views on the definition of information, on the relationship of information understood in a general way to its particular manifestations in other disciplines? Since the course (or courses) should present an identity of the discipline of Information Science, it is very important that we are convinced about the authentic existence of a large enough common ground. Can we develop a map of this territory? Can we pool resources to establish foundations
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Dear colleagues, The category of Information and Library Science contains 40+ scholarly journals in the Web-of-Science's Science Citation Index. Of these at least 10 can be identified as Information Science. The lead journal is the Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology. May universities have special schools for library and information science (LIS). This is different from our discussions at this list about information theory. Nevertheless, there is a problem with reinventing a wheel. J Best wishes, Loet Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR), Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam. Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-842239111 l...@leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ ; http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJhl=en hl=en -Original Message- From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of m...@aiu.ac.jp Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 1:24 PM To: PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ; fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Colleagues: There are some questions which periodically return to FIS discussions without conclusive answers. For instance: What is information? However, the lack of consensus regarding central concept is not an obstacle in the development of Information Science. There is no commonly accepted answer to the question What is life? But, this does not threaten the identity of Biology. Information Science has not yet achieved a status of a commonly recognized discipline. It is frequently confused with Computer Science, because of the term Informatics which in Europe denotes what in the US is called Computing, or with Library Science and sometimes even with Philosophy of Information, as visible from the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ where philosophy and science interleave on many levels. Information Science will never receive recognition without an organized effort of research community to introduce its philosophy, goals, methods, and achievements to the general audience. Books and articles popularizing the theme of information as a subject of independent study do not have big enough circulation to be sufficient in establishing an identity of the discipline. The only effective way is to introduce Information Science as a subject of education at the college level for students who do not necessarily want to specialize in this direction. Certainly, introduction of a new subject to curriculum is not easy, but it is possible. After all, Information Science is a perfect tool for integration of curriculum, especially in the context of Liberal Arts education. Which other concept, if not information, can be applied in all possible contexts of education? Now, the question is whether we are ready to come out with a syllabus for such a course acceptable for all of us, those who are involved in the subject, and those who aren't, but participate in the development of curricula. Can we overcome differences between our views on the definition of information, on the relationship of information understood in a general way to its particular manifestations in other disciplines? Since the course (or courses) should present an identity of the discipline of Information Science, it is very important that we are convinced about the authentic existence of a large enough common ground. Can we develop a map of this territory? Can we pool resources to establish foundations for a standard, Information Science curriculum? Marcin and Gordana Marcin J. Schroeder, Ph.D. Professor and Dean of Academic Affairs Akita International University Akita, Japan mailto:m...@aiu.ac.jp m...@aiu.ac.jp Gordana Dodig Crnkovic, Associate Professor Head of the Computer Science and Networks Department School of Innovation, Design and Engineering Mälardalen University Sweden http://www.mrtc.mdh.se/~gdc/ http://www.mrtc.mdh.se/~gdc/ Organizer of the Symposium on Natural/Unconventional Computing, the Turing Centenary World Congress of AISB/IACAP https://sites.google.com/site/naturalcomputingaisbiacap2012 https://sites.google.com/site/naturalcomputingaisbiacap2012 ___ fis mailing list mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
Dear Loet, I think you made an important point. It is really a problem if we use the same term Information Science for different things. What Information Science in the Web-of-Science's Science Citation Index journals is about is something different from what we thought of. Science in their case consists in systematization, description etc. - a conventional idea of science about already existing artifacts and related phenomena addressed by already established methods. That is why the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ (which is close to what we discuss within FIS) is not titled Handbook on the Philosophy of Science of Information. Maybe the field we have in mind is just Information or Foundations of Information (that is how Brian Cantwell Smith calls it)? Maybe that is why the journal Information is not in the Web-of-Science's Science Citation Index. Because we discuss things that are not mainstream and already existing. However, this does not prevent us from trying to introduce into curricula some basic knowledge that already is established in Foundations of Information. In the similar way as it is introduced in the HPI, even though many things are still under development. Best, Gordana From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff Sent: den 3 december 2011 18:08 To: m...@aiu.ac.jp; 'PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ'; fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear colleagues, The category of Information and Library Science contains 40+ scholarly journals in the Web-of-Science's Science Citation Index. Of these at least 10 can be identified as Information Science. The lead journal is the Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology. May universities have special schools for library and information science (LIS). This is different from our discussions at this list about information theory. Nevertheless, there is a problem with reinventing a wheel. :) Best wishes, Loet Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR), Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam. Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-842239111 l...@leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ ; http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJhl=en -Original Message- From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of m...@aiu.ac.jp Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 1:24 PM To: PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ; fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education Dear Colleagues: There are some questions which periodically return to FIS discussions without conclusive answers. For instance: What is information? However, the lack of consensus regarding central concept is not an obstacle in the development of Information Science. There is no commonly accepted answer to the question What is life? But, this does not threaten the identity of Biology. Information Science has not yet achieved a status of a commonly recognized discipline. It is frequently confused with Computer Science, because of the term Informatics which in Europe denotes what in the US is called Computing, or with Library Science and sometimes even with Philosophy of Information, as visible from the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ where philosophy and science interleave on many levels. Information Science will never receive recognition without an organized effort of research community to introduce its philosophy, goals, methods, and achievements to the general audience. Books and articles popularizing the theme of information as a subject of independent study do not have big enough circulation to be sufficient in establishing an identity of the discipline. The only effective way is to introduce Information Science as a subject of education at the college level for students who do not necessarily want to specialize in this direction. Certainly, introduction of a new subject to curriculum is not easy, but it is possible. After all, Information Science is a perfect tool for integration of curriculum, especially in the context of Liberal Arts education. Which other concept, if not information, can be applied in all possible contexts of education? Now, the question is whether we are ready to come out with a syllabus for such a course acceptable for all of us, those who are involved in the subject, and those who aren't, but participate in the development of curricula. Can we overcome differences between our views on the definition of information, on the relationship of information understood in a general way to its particular manifestations in other disciplines? Since the course (or courses) should present an identity of the discipline of Information Science, it is very
Re: [Fis] Discussion of Information Science Education
I find this view a little disturbing. If you do not have a definition, of some kind, of the term information. Your claim is simply equivalent to saying that you have no idea what you are talking about. How can you proceed without a clarification of terms? I can at least point toward living things, organisms, and ask: What is this and what distinguishes it? And thereby justify the question What is life? What justification do you have for asking the question: What is information? If it appears that we do not know what we are talking about, that would appear to be an adequate explanation of why Information Science has little traction. Recall my own definition of information as that which identifies cause and adds to knowledge, i.e., speaking of that which is in-formation, it rests between cause and that which determines subsequent action, it modifies that which determines subsequent action. Is information then a necessary distinction, forced upon us by the world, or is it a way of speaking, a notion that we force upon the world? And what does it mean to have a science of it? I think it is clear, Information is a way of speaking about the ongoing transformation of the unfolding world, it is a way of speaking about change. Just as cause and effect are ways of speaking about change. Information has no existential status beyond our conception of it as such. A science of information then would be the study and language of change, of differences, of the process of causes and effects and ways of speaking about them. Information exists in this sense then only if the cause it identifies makes a difference to the effect under consideration. With respect to Library Science, that I will take to be simply the organizing of text to facilitate effective access to reading materials, information science relates only to the measure of the difference such organization makes to the behavior (effective or otherwise) of those accessing these materials. This suggests that Information Science is a useful study for those that wish to reason about behaviors of any kind, and if I were to teach or study the subject then this would be the motivation for placing it into my curriculum. With respect, Steven -- Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith Institute for Advanced Science Engineering http://iase.info http://senses.info On Dec 3, 2011, at 4:23 AM, m...@aiu.ac.jp wrote: Dear Colleagues: There are some questions which periodically return to FIS discussions without conclusive answers. For instance: What is information? However, the lack of consensus regarding central concept is not an obstacle in the development of Information Science. There is no commonly accepted answer to the question What is life? But, this does not threaten the identity of Biology. Information Science has not yet achieved a status of a commonly recognized discipline. It is frequently confused with Computer Science, because of the term Informatics which in Europe denotes what in the US is called Computing, or with Library Science and sometimes even with Philosophy of Information, as visible from the Handbook on the Philosophy of Information http://www.illc.uva.nl/HPI/ where philosophy and science interleave on many levels. Information Science will never receive recognition without an organized effort of research community to introduce its philosophy, goals, methods, and achievements to the general audience. Books and articles popularizing the theme of information as a subject of independent study do not have big enough circulation to be sufficient in establishing an identity of the discipline. The only effective way is to introduce Information Science as a subject of education at the college level for students who do not necessarily want to specialize in this direction. Certainly, introduction of a new subject to curriculum is not easy, but it is possible. After all, Information Science is a perfect tool for integration of curriculum, especially in the context of Liberal Arts education. Which other concept, if not information, can be applied in all possible contexts of education? Now, the question is whether we are ready to come out with a syllabus for such a course acceptable for all of us, those who are involved in the subject, and those who aren't, but participate in the development of curricula. Can we overcome differences between our views on the definition of information, on the relationship of information understood in a general way to its particular manifestations in other disciplines? Since the course (or courses) should present an identity of the discipline of Information Science, it is very important that we are convinced about the authentic existence of a large enough common ground. Can we develop a map of this territory? Can we pool resources to establish foundations for a
