[Fis] Fw: Definition of Knowledge? (FIS Digest, Vol 530, Issue 1)

2009-10-06 Thread José María Díaz Nafría
-- Mensaje reenviado --
De: Rafael Capurro raf...@capurro.de
Fecha: 6 de octubre de 2009 02:28
Asunto: Re: [Fis] Definition of Knowledge? (FIS Digest, Vol 530, Issue 1)
Para: José María Díaz Nafría jnaf...@uax.es


dear jose maria and fis colleagues,

greetings from japan

I very much agree with pedro's suggestions about naturalizing the
concept of knowledge i.e. of not reducing it to the propositional
traditional (platonic and partly arisotelian) concept (as suggested
also by floridi building a hierarchy where the top is propositional
scientific knowledge). the concept of implicit knowldge or
fore-knowledge in hermeneutic terms is a key issue that links in some
way the 'typical' human propositional knowledge with knowledged in
non-human agents. we should diversify our concepts and avoid
hierarchical and dogmatic human-centered views also through a classic
connection of data becoming information becoming knowledge, where
'becoming' is some kind of black box that explains nothing.

kind regards

rafael




Zitat von José María Díaz Nafría jnaf...@uax.es:

 Dear FIS colleagues:

 I apologize for being so quiet, considering the interesting topics
 arisen with the occasion of our proposal to the COST open call of past
 March, which we thank once again. This proposal as revisited by FIS
 came to coincide in time with a call for themes proposal by the
 European Science Foundation (Eurocores Theme Proposal), which we also
 presented with a short timing. We may not succeed in the first
 attempt, but anyhow it aims at opening a new scientific topic in the
 ESF. If the proposed theme were selected, new projects in the
 delimited field (well fitted to FIS interests) from any European state
 could be presented to joint the research network. I say that, to
 justify our silence in the FIS arena, while we were actually working
 on it, although in the background. Afterwards, it was too late to
 answer, when already other issues were under discussion… To keep on
 the argument thread of our COST essays: we were not among the few
 selected proposals, but were given reasons to hope and reworked the
 proposal and applied again one week ago. About the theme proposal for
 Eurocores, we do not have any evaluation yet.

 Even if I am not answering straight forward Pedro’s words, I feel that
 we should let FISers know our efforts in finding new cooperative
 research scenarios within the realm of FIS interests. Now taking back
 Pedro’s proposal of discussion about knowledge: on the one hand, I
 cordially thank Pedro’s initiative of bringing to this outstanding
 stage a part of our elucidation; on the other hand, before saying
 something about the topic, I feel the need to set the context were the
 strive for this definition take place, which also implies giving a
 general idea about BITrum project (see
 http://www.unileon.es/congresos/bitrum/T_Bitrum_presentation.htm),
 where we pursue an interdisciplinary approach to the information
 concept from a maximally open perspective, aiming at the mutual
 understanding of all the concerned points of view. As you may see in
 the given link, one of the main means to get such a mutual
 understanding is a glossary of concepts, metaphors, theories and
 problems concerning information. At the first stage, it should help in
 the definition of working teams, while in following stages it may
 become an arena of discussion about particular issues, a reference of
 specific themes and crystallization of both research (within working
 teams) and consensus.
 Hence, the elucidation itself will be somehow reflected in this
 glossary, which edition has already started and its first public
 version -although very incomplete- will see the light at the end of
 this year.

 Although BITrum members are committed to feed the glossary, any
 interested author is wellcomed to contribute. The managing schema of
 the glossary includes: 1) a coordination board for glossary edition;
 2) an editor per article, who takes over the integration of every
 contribution to such voice in a non redundant and rather systematic
 article; 3) any other may contribute, as author or coauthor, with
 entries, which will be afterwards integrated by the editor in an
 article.
 As an example, Pedro is editor of the voices: “Action-perception
 cycle”; “Cognit”; “Foundations of Information Science”; “Knowledge
 recombination”. Other FISers, like Rafael Capurro, Wolfgang
 Hofkirchner or Peter Fleissner also contribute as editors of other
 voices.

 After having given a general picture of the glossary and the projects
 where it is a main axis, I feel free to go to the settled discussion
 about knowledge, in which I contributed with the following entry to
 the voice (I do not bring the other two entries to this voice, since
 they are still in Spanish):

 * * * KNOWLEDGE * * *
 NOTE: “[voice]” denotes that such voice is developed among glossary voices.

 From the most viewpoints regarding information and knowledge, the
 

[Fis] FW: Fw: Definition of Knowledge?

2009-10-06 Thread Christophe Menant

Dear FIS colleagues,
Knowledge is a wide and interesting subject as applied to us humans. But what 
about knowledge in the world of animals ?
What about an evolutionary approach to knowledge that takes into account 
simpler forms of knowledge management as existing in animals ? 
We Humans can consciously manage knowledge. But the performance of human 
consciousness does not imply that knowledge is absent in animals. We also 
manage knowledge unconsciously.
And knowledge is a personal and social construction. It is a tool we use all 
the time in our everyday life to satisfy various constraints. For finding our 
way in a city as well as for doing math. We acquire and use knowledge 
automatically as well as consciously by introspection. But the difference is 
more about complexity than about nature. In both cases we manage meaningful 
information for some purpose. 
Animals also have constraints to satisfy, the key one being to stay alive. Most 
animals miss a conscious self to be in a position of conscious introspection 
(perhaps some of our cousins like chimpanzee or bonobo have a minimum sense of 
conscious self that allow them a minimum of introspection). 
So I feel that the concept of knowledge deserves being addressed in an 
evolutionary background in order to allow a bottom-up approach highlighting 
simpler cases than human one (just to work as long as possible without the 
“hard problem”, and bring it back in explicitly later). Animals are submitted 
to constraint satisfaction processes as we humans are (with different 
constraints coming in addition). So the foundations of knowledge look to me as 
constraint satisfaction driven.
Such a bottom-up approach allows to bridge knowledge with meaning generation, 
and perhaps what is available for the latter can be used for the former 
(http://cogprints.org/6279/2/MGS.pdf).
Following the same thread, let me tell you also about an extension of the 
notion of meaningful information to the one of meaningful representation. It is 
proposed that a meaningful representation of an entity for an agent submitted 
to constraints is the network of meanings relative to that entity. These 
networks of meanings contain the dynamic aspect of meaning generation with the 
consequences of implemented actions, as well the action scenarios with past 
experiences or simulations making available anticipation performances. We are 
far from the GOFAI types of representations. Such meaningful representations 
are interactive and imbed the agent in its environment (more on this at 
http://www.idt.mdh.se/ECAP-2005/INFOCOMPBOOK/CHAPTERS/MenantChristophe.pdf).
To echo Jose Maria, we could consider that meaningful information and 
representations are somehow ‘nourishing’ knowledge.
All the best
Christophe
 
 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:32:46 +0200
 From: jnaf...@uax.es
 To: fis@listas.unizar.es
 Subject: [Fis] Fw: Definition of Knowledge? (FIS Digest, Vol 530, Issue 1)
 
 -- Mensaje reenviado --
 De: Rafael Capurro raf...@capurro.de
 Fecha: 6 de octubre de 2009 02:28
 Asunto: Re: [Fis] Definition of Knowledge? (FIS Digest, Vol 530, Issue 1)
 Para: José María Díaz Nafría jnaf...@uax.es
 
 
 dear jose maria and fis colleagues,
 
 greetings from japan
 
 I very much agree with pedro's suggestions about naturalizing the
 concept of knowledge i.e. of not reducing it to the propositional
 traditional (platonic and partly arisotelian) concept (as suggested
 also by floridi building a hierarchy where the top is propositional
 scientific knowledge). the concept of implicit knowldge or
 fore-knowledge in hermeneutic terms is a key issue that links in some
 way the 'typical' human propositional knowledge with knowledged in
 non-human agents. we should diversify our concepts and avoid
 hierarchical and dogmatic human-centered views also through a classic
 connection of data becoming information becoming knowledge, where
 'becoming' is some kind of black box that explains nothing.
 
 kind regards
 
 rafael
 
 
 
 
 Zitat von José María Díaz Nafría jnaf...@uax.es:
 
  Dear FIS colleagues:
 
  I apologize for being so quiet, considering the interesting topics
  arisen with the occasion of our proposal to the COST open call of past
  March, which we thank once again. This proposal as revisited by FIS
  came to coincide in time with a call for themes proposal by the
  European Science Foundation (Eurocores Theme Proposal), which we also
  presented with a short timing. We may not succeed in the first
  attempt, but anyhow it aims at opening a new scientific topic in the
  ESF. If the proposed theme were selected, new projects in the
  delimited field (well fitted to FIS interests) from any European state
  could be presented to joint the research network. I say that, to
  justify our silence in the FIS arena, while we were actually working
  on it, although in the background. Afterwards, it was too late to
  answer, when already other issues were under discussion… To keep on
  the argument 

Re: [Fis] Fw: Definition of Knowledge? (FIS Digest, Vol 530, Issue 1)

2009-10-06 Thread Steven Ericsson-Zenith
Necessary and sufficient distinctions:

Knowledge is that which determines subsequent action.

Information in that which identifies cause and adds to knowledge.

With respect,
Steven

--
Institute for Advanced Science  Engineering
http://IASE.info
http://senses.info


On Oct 6, 2009, at 6:32 AM, José María Díaz Nafría jnaf...@uax.es  
wrote:

 -- Mensaje reenviado --
 De: Rafael Capurro raf...@capurro.de
 Fecha: 6 de octubre de 2009 02:28
 Asunto: Re: [Fis] Definition of Knowledge? (FIS Digest, Vol 530,  
 Issue 1)
 Para: José María Díaz Nafría jnaf...@uax.es


 dear jose maria and fis colleagues,

 greetings from japan

 I very much agree with pedro's suggestions about naturalizing the
 concept of knowledge i.e. of not reducing it to the propositional
 traditional (platonic and partly arisotelian) concept (as suggested
 also by floridi building a hierarchy where the top is propositional
 scientific knowledge). the concept of implicit knowldge or
 fore-knowledge in hermeneutic terms is a key issue that links in some
 way the 'typical' human propositional knowledge with knowledged in
 non-human agents. we should diversify our concepts and avoid
 hierarchical and dogmatic human-centered views also through a classic
 connection of data becoming information becoming knowledge, where
 'becoming' is some kind of black box that explains nothing.

 kind regards

 rafael




 Zitat von José María Díaz Nafría jnaf...@uax.es:

 Dear FIS colleagues:

 I apologize for being so quiet, considering the interesting topics
 arisen with the occasion of our proposal to the COST open call of  
 past
 March, which we thank once again. This proposal as revisited by FIS
 came to coincide in time with a call for themes proposal by the
 European Science Foundation (Eurocores Theme Proposal), which we also
 presented with a short timing. We may not succeed in the first
 attempt, but anyhow it aims at opening a new scientific topic in the
 ESF. If the proposed theme were selected, new projects in the
 delimited field (well fitted to FIS interests) from any European  
 state
 could be presented to joint the research network. I say that, to
 justify our silence in the FIS arena, while we were actually working
 on it, although in the background. Afterwards, it was too late to
 answer, when already other issues were under discussion… To keep on
 the argument thread of our COST essays: we were not among the few
 selected proposals, but were given reasons to hope and reworked the
 proposal and applied again one week ago. About the theme proposal for
 Eurocores, we do not have any evaluation yet.

 Even if I am not answering straight forward Pedro’s words, I feel  
 that
 we should let FISers know our efforts in finding new cooperative
 research scenarios within the realm of FIS interests. Now taking back
 Pedro’s proposal of discussion about knowledge: on the one hand, I
 cordially thank Pedro’s initiative of bringing to this outstanding
 stage a part of our elucidation; on the other hand, before saying
 something about the topic, I feel the need to set the context were  
 the
 strive for this definition take place, which also implies giving a
 general idea about BITrum project (see
 http://www.unileon.es/congresos/bitrum/T_Bitrum_presentation.htm),
 where we pursue an interdisciplinary approach to the information
 concept from a maximally open perspective, aiming at the mutual
 understanding of all the concerned points of view. As you may see in
 the given link, one of the main means to get such a mutual
 understanding is a glossary of concepts, metaphors, theories and
 problems concerning information. At the first stage, it should help  
 in
 the definition of working teams, while in following stages it may
 become an arena of discussion about particular issues, a reference of
 specific themes and crystallization of both research (within working
 teams) and consensus.
 Hence, the elucidation itself will be somehow reflected in this
 glossary, which edition has already started and its first public
 version -although very incomplete- will see the light at the end of
 this year.

 Although BITrum members are committed to feed the glossary, any
 interested author is wellcomed to contribute. The managing schema of
 the glossary includes: 1) a coordination board for glossary edition;
 2) an editor per article, who takes over the integration of every
 contribution to such voice in a non redundant and rather systematic
 article; 3) any other may contribute, as author or coauthor, with
 entries, which will be afterwards integrated by the editor in an
 article.
 As an example, Pedro is editor of the voices: “Action-perception
 cycle”; “Cognit”; “Foundations of Information Science”;  
 “Knowledge
 recombination”. Other FISers, like Rafael Capurro, Wolfgang
 Hofkirchner or Peter Fleissner also contribute as editors of other
 voices.

 After having given a general picture of the glossary and the projects
 where it is a main axis, I 

Re: [Fis] FW: Fw: Definition of Knowledge?

2009-10-06 Thread Loet Leydesdorff
  S: The difference between us and animals is basically language.

   S: Why not 'check out' 'Biosemiotics'?
 
 STAN

Dear Stan, 

I don't understand the bio in this. If we distinguish between two systems
of reference for knowledge -- discursive knowledge to be attributed to
interhuman communication, and personal knowledge to be attributed to human
psychologies -- the latter one is biologically embedded by the body, but the
former is only embedded by human minds (which are of course embodied).
Knowledge can then also be globalized and become person-independent. In
other words: discursive knowledge is generated bottom-up, but control can be
top-down.

Shouldn't it therefore be psycho-semiotics? Bio-semiotics is only valid
for personalized knowledge. (For the good order, let me hasten to add that
the two systems of knowledge -- the interpersonal and the personal ones --
are reflexive to each other.) 

Best wishes, 


Loet


Loet Leydesdorff 
Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR), 
Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam. 
Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-20- 525 3681 
l...@leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ 


___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis