Dear Francesco.
It was a misunderstanding.
The word "weak" in frase " 4th and 5th momenta are weak in FIS
discussions." has a quantitative (not qualitative) meaning.
In statistical context "weak" means "few times".
It is not my intention to qualify the discussions, I want to count them. :-)
You
Caro Moises Andrè e Cari Tutti,
resto sorpreso del fatto che si ritenga debole la discussione sulle scienze
sociali. Soprattutto in questi ultimi anni ho comunicato di avere inventato
una "Nuova economia" basata proprio sulla terna semiotica della
significazione, dell'informazione e della
Hi, Pedro.
Hi, FISers.
I understand that Pedro proposed a discussion about the discussions, and I
think it is very necessary.
There are more than contents in this list, the structure and directions of
the discussions are also important. After all, one of the main objectives
of Information Science
To Loet and Marcus: let us agree that disciplines are based on "communities of
inquiry" that follow strict laws of "intellectual economy". Our limited
capabilities force us to establish disciplinary specialization, and that's
good, but a healthy knowledge system would also establish quite many
Dear FIS colleagues,
Thanks to all for the valuable insights. Responding briefly:
To Joseph: perhaps your points, although interesting, are not truly an
itinerary. For instance, WuKun and Lupasco belong to the First Momentum
(philos.). I agree that they can be adequate first steps (but there
in the background.
Comments welcome.
Best wishes,
Joseph
- Original Message -
From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>
To: <fis@listas.unizar.es>
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Five Momenta. Five Itineraries
Dear FIS coll
Dear Pedro and List,
A note to add that the momenta in Pedro's question of disciplinary scope is
very much on my mind as I undertake the final structuring of the content of my
book on this now very broad subject. This final restructuring has taken much of
my attention over the past week or
