Re: [Fis] Concluding the Session on the Great Domains - brief analysis

2015-07-10 Thread Moisés André Nisenbaum
Hi, Pedro.
I think that your and Raquel's work on historic organization of FIS
discussion is very important to all FISers.
Thank you very much for this (hard) work, and if you need any help, you can
count on me :-)
Bibliometric studies on FIS list will be part of my PhD research and I hope
I can interview FIS members (as I did with Bob - it was an amazing
interview!) to add qualitative data to this measurements.

About collective intelligence, it reminds me Pierre Levy's book
Collective Intelligence: Mankind's Emerging World in Cyberspace (1997)
that explain what is his definition Collective Intelligence and
some developments. His article From social computing to reflexive
collective intelligence: The IEML research program (2010) in Information
Sciences journal proposes a Information Economy MetaLanguage to work
with Collective Intelligence concept. It is a very interesting subject, but
unfortunately I didn't have time to read much about.

About the crisis on creative thought and deep interdisciplinary
engagement, in my opinion is because science today (as many other things)
is always in a hurry. Researches are where the money is. And money wants
results as fast as possible. But there are good initiatives, like this list
and ArXiv for example, that is working against this system.


Best,

Moisés


References:

LÉVY, Pierre. Collective Intelligence: Mankind’s Emerging World in
Cyberspace. Cambrigde, Mass.: Perseus Books, 1997.
LÉVY, Pierre. From social computing to reflexive collective intelligence:
The IEML research program. Information Sciences, v. 180, n. 1, p. 71-94,
2010.



2015-07-10 8:30 GMT-03:00 Pedro C. Marijuan pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es:

 Dear Moises, Ken, and FIS colleagues,

 First of all, thanks to you two for chairing the discussion session. Also,
 for a different matter, to Raquel del Moral. She has been working with me
 in the complete archive of fis messages and recapitulating the whole fis
 discussion-sessions celebrated (starting by the the virtual conference
 long ago, in 1998). It is a big novelty in the fis webpage. Please, have a
 glance at:  http://fis.sciforum.net/fis-discussion-sessions/
 Hopefully it will allow quite many future bibliometric studies...

 A closer relationship between classical information/library science and a
 renewed information science as was attempted in the session is important.
 Organizing the stock of accumulated knowledge in this epoch of
 multidisciplinarity, of instant data access, of increasing research
 complexity, of pervasive big data, of massive innovation, etc. should imply
 new thinking styles and a new reflection on the individual mind versus the
 aggregate system of collective intelligence. Unfortunately I do not see
 much advancement in that matter --even the opposite. The talk about the
 global brain is superficial at best. The attentional saturation of the
 social environment during the last decade is strongly diminishing the
 individual capabilities for really creative thought and deep
 interdisciplinary engagement (for instance, less and less interesting new
 books). The dangers inherent in the mechanization of knowledge, as was
 warning a celebrated essay by Harold Innis (McLuhan's mentor), could become
 real  in our time.

 So, if the above lamentations have a grain of truth, we have not much
 succeeded in the ongoing discussion. If the new mission of library science,
 hand to hand with the new information science, should also include the
 qualitative thinking on the social and institutional conditions for
 advancement of knowledge in its widest sense (humanist too), we have a lot
 of pending work to do. I hope not to be sounding pessimistic! I was
 motivated by some recent comment of an Indian researcher (Sunita Narain) on
 waste management: the key obstacle is that everyday challenges are not top
 priorities for research and innovation. Indian science has always been
 fascinated by the 'masculine' agendas of space and genetics, not
 reinventing the toilet. Instead, science must meet the needs of poor
 people. We need to devise ways to prevent pollution rather than cleaning it
 up afterwards. Indian research has to be more humble, nimble and
 investigative... India's ambition should be to become front-runner in the
 race to save the planet. (Nature 2015, vol. 521, pp:155)

 Best--Pedro


 Moisés André Nisenbaum wrote:


 Dear FIS Colleagues,

 First, I want to thank Pedro and everyone the opportunity to introduce,
 participate and observe the development of debate “THE FOURTH GREAT DOMAIN
 OF SCIENCE: INFORMATIONAL?”

  I spent the last days documenting the posts related to this discussion.
 On this basis, I will present some numbers and comments about these rich
 discussions.




 --
 -
 Pedro C. Marijuán
 Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
 Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
 Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
 Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X
 

[Fis] Concluding the Session on the Great Domains - brief analysis

2015-07-05 Thread Moisés André Nisenbaum
Dear FIS Colleagues,

First, I want to thank Pedro and everyone the opportunity to introduce,
participate and observe the development of debate “THE FOURTH GREAT DOMAIN
OF SCIENCE: INFORMATIONAL?”

 I spent the last days documenting the posts related to this discussion. On
this basis, I will present some numbers and comments about these rich
discussions.


1) The debate has 114 posts in 26 subjects. The subjects were grouped by
similarity and the count is shown in the table below.


  Subject  # of posts

 THE FOURTH GREAT DOMAIN OF SCIENCE: INFORMATIONAL?

26

 It From Bit

26

 Philosophy, Computing, and Information - apologies!

16

 It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

12

 FIS newcomer

11

 What are information and science?

7

 Krassimir's Notes . . .

6

 QM and information

2

 We have different “fen clubs” depending of sympathy to one or other
definition of information

2

 Ada Lovelace inspires a question: why are so few women in FIS list?

2

 Concluding the Session on the Great Domains

1

 Thinking Out Loud – a “meaning (-ful/less) continuum”

1

 information as physical entity

1

 Garfield 1955 - organizing metadata for scientific literature

1

*Totals*

114



Of course, the subject of debate had the highest number of posts. The topic
It from bit, brought by Ken through a video, philosophical discussions
about information was also of great interest.



2) 31 people participated in the debate. The number of each author posts
and the number of times each one have been cited are in the table below:
  Post authors and cited

Author

Cited

John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za

11

15

Loet Leydesdorff l...@leydesdorff.net

9

11

Marcus Abundis 55m...@gmail.com

9

10

Joseph Brenner joe.bren...@bluewin.ch

8

8

Ken Herold kher...@hamilton.edu

7

5

Pedro C. Marijuan pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es

7

11

Francesco Rizzo 13francesco.ri...@gmail.com

6

2

Krassimir Markov mar...@foibg.com

5

6

Moisés André Nisenbaum moises.nisenb...@ifrj.edu.br

5

8

Stanley N Salthe ssal...@binghamton.edu

5

4

Steven Ericsson-Zenith ste...@iase.us

5

2

Xueshan Yan y...@pku.edu.cn

4

1

Andrei Khrennikov andrei.khrenni...@lnu.se

3

2

Emanuel Diamant emanl@gmail.com

3

4

Koichiro Matsuno cxq02...@nifty.com

3

5

Robert K. Logan lo...@physics.utoronto.ca

3

4

Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be

2

2

Dai Griffiths dai.griffith...@gmail.com

2

1

Howard Bloom howlbl...@aol.com

2

3

Jeremy Sherman mindreadersdiction...@gmail.com

2

1

Jerry LR Chandler Jerry LR chandler_lr_chand...@me.com

2

1

Rafael Capurro raf...@capurro.de

2

6

Robert E. Ulanowicz u...@umces.edu

2

1

Srinandan Dasmahapatra s...@ecs.soton.ac.uk

2

2

Terrence W. DEACON dea...@berkeley.edu

2

2

Dino Buzzetti dino.buzze...@gmail.com

1

2

Günther Witzany witz...@sbg.at

1

0

Søren Brier sb@cbs.dk

1

0

Søren sb@cbs.dk

0

1

witzany witz...@sbg.at

0

2

*Totals*

114

122



The posts were very interesting. Despite the limitation of two messages per
week, most of the participants contributed significantly. I believe that
was many private messages, which unfortunately I did not have how to
analyze. I had the opportunity to exchange a few private messages with
Pedro, Ken, Bob, Capurro, Jhon, Loet and Joseph, and all was precious,
thank you!

3) I also made a qualitative analysis of the posts that I will not bring
here because it is very extensive. In particular, the group brought several
topics from physics. This physical --- information association is of
great interest to my research (I study interdisciplinarity between physics
and information science).



If anyone is interested in the raw data this little analysis, just ask me.



Thank you very much,



Um abraço for all!



Moisés


-- 
Moisés André Nisenbaum
Doutorando IBICT/UFRJ. Professor. Msc.
Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro - IFRJ
Campus Maracanã
moises.nisenb...@ifrj.edu.br
___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis