Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.012977572 = product of:
  0.10382058 = sum of:
    0.10382058 = weight(_text_:work in 2007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10382058 = score(doc=2007,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.72994435 = fieldWeight in 2007, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2007)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The concept of the work in art differs from and challenges traditional concepts of the work in bibliography. Whereas the traditional bibliographic concept of the work takes an ideational approach that incorporates mentalist epistemologies, container-content metaphors, and the conduit metaphor of information transfer and re-presentation, the concept of the work of art as is presented here begins with the site-specific and time-valued nature of the object as a product of human labor and as an event that is emergent through cultural forms and from social situations. The account of the work, here, is thus materialist and expressionist rather than ideational. This article takes the discussion of the work in the philosopher Martin Heidegger's philosophical-historical account and joins this with the concept of the work in the modern avant-garde, toward bringing into critique the traditional bibliographic conception of the work and toward illuminating a materialist perspective that may be useful in understanding cultural work-objects, as well as texts proper.

0.006243838 = product of:
  0.049950704 = sum of:
    0.049950704 = weight(_text_:work in 3461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049950704 = score(doc=3461,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.35119468 = fieldWeight in 3461, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3461)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

"Implicit knowledge" and "tacit knowledge" in Knowledge Management (KM) are important, often synonymous, terms. In KM they often refer to private or personal knowledge that needs to be made public. The original reference of "tacit knowledge" is to the work of the late scientist and philosopher, Michael Polanyi (Polanyi, 1969), but there is substantial evidence that the KM discourse has poorly understood Polanyi's term. Two theoretical problems in Knowledge Management's notion of "implicit knowledge," which undermine empirical work in this area, are examined. The first problem involves understanding the term "knowledge" according to a folk-psychology of mental representation to model expression. The second is epistemological and social: understanding Polanyi's term, tacit knowing as a psychological concept instead of as an epistemological problem, in general, and one of social epistemology and of the epistemology of the sciences, in particular. Further, exploring Polanyi's notion of tacit knowing in more detail yields important insights into the role of knowledge in science, including empirical work in information science. This article has two parts: first, there is a discussion of the folk-psychology model of representation and the need to replace this with a more expressionist model. In the second part, Polanyi's concept of tacit knowledge in relation to the role of analogical thought in expertise is examined. The works of philosophers, particularly Harre and Wittgenstein, are brought to bear an these problems. Conceptual methods play several roles in information science that cannot satisfactorily be performed empirically at all or alone. Among these roles, such methods may examine historical issues, they may critically engage foundational assumptions, and they may deploy new concepts. In this article the last two roles are examined.

0.0061176866 = product of:
  0.048941493 = sum of:
    0.048941493 = weight(_text_:work in 985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048941493 = score(doc=985,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.3440991 = fieldWeight in 985, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=985)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This article engages one of the most important concepts in Knowledge Management, namely, the concept of "social capital," focusing upon the problem of measure and value in capitalism, specifically within the period and conditions of post-Fordist production. The article engages work that has emerged from out of the Italian Workerist and Autonomist Marxist movements (as well as French post-structuralist theory) since the 1960s, and it particularly focuses upon the work of the contemporary Italian philosopher and political activist, Antonio Negri.' In doing so, it presents a more politically "Left" development of the concept of social capital than is often possible within the largely Management-defined discourses common to Knowledge Management. At the same time, however, the article points to the importance of Knowledge Management as a symptom of a turn in political economy, even though Knowledge Management, because of its provenance, has been unable to fully explore social capital as a shift in capitalist notions of value.

0.0036048815 = product of:
  0.028839052 = sum of:
    0.028839052 = weight(_text_:work in 3813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028839052 = score(doc=3813,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.20276234 = fieldWeight in 3813, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3813)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

For his book Indexing It All: The Subject in the Age of Documentation, Information, and Data, Ronald E. Day was honored with the 2015 ASIS&T Best Information Science Book award. In this afterword, Day explains that the book examines the concept of "aboutness" in the modern documentary tradition covering information science and data science. In writing the book, Day wanted to sort out the relationship between subject and object, between user and document, the core of information science and prelude to information retrieval. He considers the transition of a text serving a group audience to a document serving individual user needs, facilitated by an array of digital technologies. Referencing historical precursors Paul Otlet and Suzanne Briet, he considers documentation as evidence that, depending on the viewpoint chosen, may be a construction or a representation of a concept. Day considers his book a dystopian work, asserting that information technology has been charged with answering both information and cultural needs and has given rise to users' addiction to technology. He anticipates data and documents to both influence and be influenced by evolving technologies, cultural forms and social norms with the document form persisting, though transformed.

0.002883905 = product of:
  0.02307124 = sum of:
    0.02307124 = weight(_text_:work in 3024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02307124 = score(doc=3024,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03875087 = queryNorm
        0.16220987 = fieldWeight in 3024, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3024)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

In this book, Ronald Day offers a critical history of the modern tradition of documentation. Focusing on the documentary index (understood as a mode of social positioning), and drawing on the work of the French documentalist Suzanne Briet, Day explores the understanding and uses of indexicality. He examines the transition as indexes went from being explicit professional structures that mediated users and documents to being implicit infrastructural devices used in everyday information and communication acts. Doing so, he also traces three epistemic eras in the representation of individuals and groups, first in the forms of documents, then information, then data. Day investigates five cases from the modern tradition of documentation. He considers the socio-technical instrumentalism of Paul Otlet, "the father of European documentation" (contrasting it to the hermeneutic perspective of Martin Heidegger); the shift from documentation to information science and the accompanying transformation of persons and texts into users and information; social media's use of algorithms, further subsuming persons and texts; attempts to build android robots -- to embody human agency within an information system that resembles a human being; and social "big data" as a technique of neoliberal governance that employs indexing and analytics for purposes of surveillance. Finally, Day considers the status of critique and judgment at a time when people and their rights of judgment are increasingly mediated, displaced, and replaced by modern documentary techniques.