The foundation of information science: one world or three? A discussion of Gnoli (2018)
| Published date | 14 January 2019 |
| Date | 14 January 2019 |
| Pages | 164-171 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-06-2018-0100 |
| Author | Birger Hjørland |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Records management & preservation,Document management,Classification & cataloguing,Information behaviour & retrieval,Collection building & management,Scholarly communications/publishing,Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance,Information management,Information & communications technology,Internet |
The foundation of information
science: one world or three? A
discussion of Gnoli (2018)
Birger Hjørland
Department of Information Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to make a critical analysis of the views put forward by Claudio Gnoli
(2018) in this paper concerning philosophical problems in library and information science (LIS).
Design/methodology/approach –The paper presents the basic ideas in Gnoli (2018) and discusses the set
of basic assumptions, concepts and conclusions put forward.
Findings –It is argued that the idea of the theory of levels is basically sound, but we do not need to consider the
material world, the mental world (minds) and the world of mentefacts as three different worlds. They represent
different levels with different kinds of emergent properties in the world. Further, although the concepts of artif acts
and mentefacts are useful, there are other terms within LIS, such as document, work and object that have been
influential and should be discussed in this context. It is also argued that subjective vs objective knowledge is often
confused with private vs public knowledge, which is problematic. Finally, it is claimed that the cognitive view and
the “sociological view”are not about two different levels of reality but are competing views about the same reality.
Originality/value –The paper clarifies some aspects of the analytical framework of domain analysis and
adds to the developments of the philosophical dimensions of information within LIS.
Keywords Cognition, Information science, Theory, Documents, Epistemology, Information research
Paper type Conceptual paper
1. Introduction
Gnoli (2018) suggested a synthesis of the cognitive and the sociological view in library and
information science (LIS) and knowledge organization (KO) based on, among other, Karl R.
Popper’s“three worlds”metaphysics and on the concept of mentefact. The paper represents
a fine piece of scholarship on an important and difficult subject and the careful study of the
theory of mentefact provide useful information about a neglected concept.
The present paper demonstrates that another philosophical perspective of the mind,
monism, may solve the same problems in a more satisfactory way. In addition, it is claimed
that the concepts document and work, within a monistic framework, are able to contribute to
solve the issues, which Gnoli uses in his argument for Popper’s“world three.”
2. Gnoli’s main arguments
Gnoli (2018, pp. 1227-1228) argued from the perspective of levels of reality:
The theory of levels of reality (Poli, 2001) provides an important intellectual tool to better analyze
the relationships holding between different principles of explanation. This theory identifies a series
of different levels in reality, each resting on lower levels but also showing novel emergent
properties that are not owned by the lower levels. Among the main levels that are commonly
acknowledged by most authors are matter, life, mind, and society.
Gnoli further argues that the cognitive approach in LIS emphasizes the role of mind in the
production, organization and retrieval of information while the sociological[1] one –which is
Journal of Documentation
Vol. 75 No. 1, 2019
pp. 164-171
Emerald Publishing Limited
0022-0418
DOI 10.1108/JD-06-2018-0100
Received 24 June 2018
Revised 30 August 2018
Accepted 1 September 2018
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0022-0418.htm
© Birger Hjørland. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and
create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to
full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at
http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
164
JD
75,1
To continue reading
Request your trial