1 / 23

Integrating Phenomena and Activities in Knowledge Organization: A Theoretical Exploration

This theoretical study examines the integration of phenomena and activities in knowledge organization systems, exploring the concept of dimensions of knowledge, interdisciplinary approaches, and the implications for classification and categorization. The discussion delves into Claudio Gnoli's work on classification by phenomena, activities, and integrative levels, as well as the application of facet analysis in knowledge organization. The text also touches upon the relationship between disciplines, classification systems, and activity theory in the context of information behavior research. Open problems and potential future research directions are outlined, highlighting the significance of innovative and non-standard ideas in knowledge organization.

latoyajames
Download Presentation

Integrating Phenomena and Activities in Knowledge Organization: A Theoretical Exploration

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ISKO UK 2011, London Vickery’s late ideas on classification by phenomena and activities Claudio Gnoli (University of Pavia. Science and Technology Library) (ISKO Italy)

  2. Dear Brian, ...

  3. Facet analysis

  4. photo by Chris Overfield

  5. “Ranga” and the CRG S.R. RanganathanB.I. Palmer source: DRTC

  6. Facets vs. operators “[Farradane] was never a whole-hearted “faceteer”. [...] Foskett and I used to say, that the more Jason expounded his ideas on his “operators”, the more we disagreed with him, and the more we liked him.” [BCV, email, 2007] An interesting minority in the CRG [Kawamura pers. comm.] supporting free over faceted classification [Gardin 1965]: facet: free (phase) relationship: A has property BA is related to B (Vickery, Foskett, Mills...) (Farradane, Coates, Austin...)  BC2  PRECIS

  7. A scientific approach J. D. Bernal CRG Joseph Needham J.E.L. Farradane (CRG): “I want to list the wind where it bloweth” i.e. place of unique definition

  8. Integrative levels [CRG 1969]

  9. Integrative levels “Any transition may seem mysterious when we understand very little about it.” [BCV, email, 2007] “the concept of levels of phenomena is today well beyond a philosophical idea: [... it] may be accepted as a “reliable” fact.” [BCV, email, 2009]

  10. Phenomena vs. disciplines • Subject Classification (Brown, 1906) • CRG NATO classification (esp. Foskett, Austin, 1969) • BC2 classes 4/6 (Mills & Broughton, 1977) • BSO class 088 (Coates et al., 1978) • ICC (“objects of being”, Dahlberg, 1982) • other proposals (Bonner, Scheele, Shpackov, 1980s) • ILC project (Gnoli, Hong, Cousson, Pullman et al., 2004-) • León Manifesto (Szostak, López-Huertas, Gnoli et al., 2007)

  11. The León Manifesto • interdisciplinarity • requires some new KOS • based on phenomena • allowing to shift between perspectives • by analytico-synthetic techniques

  12. “From the world to the classifier” • “The world = Phenomena • People’s activities = Disciplines, fields of activity • Reports of activities • Subjects of reports • Classification of subjects” • [BCV commenting on León Manifesto, 2007]

  13. Dimensions of knowledge  reality, “noumena”   phenomena   perspectives   carriers = ( ) activities

  14. Fields of activity • ”Economic (production, commerce, finance) • Technological (innovation) • ·Welfare (medical, social benefits, charities, information) • Cultural (arts, sport, entertainment, the media, hobbies) • ·State (government, law, police, military) • ·Political (to change aspects of society, the struggle for power) • Religious activities • ·Educational activities (general, and within any of the above) • ·Specialist intellectual (theoretical studies of any of the above) • ·General intellectual (e.g. philosophy, mathematics, sciences) • ·Consumption (everyday use of the products or services of the others)” • [BCV, 2007]

  15. Problem of the border molecules phenomena planets plants  mining agriculture activities research practical intellectual

  16. Facets phenomena P, M, E, S, T  activities ?

  17. Activity theory

  18. Activity theory USSR psychology A.N. Leontev (1903-1979) S.L. Rubinshtein (1889-1960)

  19. Activity theory basic notions: motivation, goal, activity, tools, object, outcome, rules, community,division... “all directly applicable to the conduct of information behaviour research” [Wilson 2006]

  20. Facets phenomena P, M, E, S, T  activities Motivation, Goal, Tool, Outcome, Rule, ...

  21. Open problems • Is dimension α (noumena) necessary in KO models? • Should the perspective/activities dimension also include such classes like agriculture and the arts? • How could disciplines be treated in the framework of activity theory?...

  22. Conclusions • Late BCV was very active in theoretical KO debate • He supported non-standard or new ideas, like abandoning disciplines as main division • Original contributions not widely known yet • worth to be considered and possibly developed

  23. Thank you... source: BCV’s website

More Related