Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.012450825 = product of:
  0.0498033 = sum of:
    0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025667597 = score(doc=5079,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
    0.024135707 = weight(_text_:of in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024135707 = score(doc=5079,freq=104.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37376386 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
          10.198039 = tf(freq=104.0), with freq of:
            104.0 = termFreq=104.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

The concept of information as we use it in everyday English, in the sense of knowledge communicated, plays a central role in contemporary society. The development and widespread use of computer networks since the end of World War II, and the emergence of information science as a discipline in the 1950s, are evidence of this focus. Although knowledge and its communication are basic phenomena of every human society, it is the rise of information technology and its global impacts that characterize ours as an information society. It is commonplace to consider information as a basic condition for economic development together with capital, labor, and raw material; but what makes information especially significant at present is its digital nature. The impact of information technology an the natural and social sciences in particular has made this everyday notion a highly controversial concept. Claude Shannon's (1948) "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" is a landmark work, referring to the common use of information with its semantic and pragmatic dimensions, while at the same time redefining the concept within an engineering framework. The fact that the concept of knowledge communication has been designated by the word information seems, prima facie, a linguistic happenstance. For a science like information science (IS), it is of course important how fundamental terms are defined; and in IS, as in other fields, the question of how to define information is often raised. This chapter is an attempt to review the status of the concept of information in IS, with reference also to interdisciplinary trends. In scientific discourse, theoretical concepts are not true or false elements or glimpses of some element of reality; rather, they are constructions designed to do a job in the best possible way. Different conceptions of fundamental terms like information are thus more or less fruitful, depending an the theories (and in the end, the practical actions) they are expected to support. In the opening section, we discuss the problem of defining terms from the perspective of the philosophy of science. The history of a word provides us with anecdotes that are tangential to the concept itself. But in our case, the use of the word information points to a specific perspective from which the concept of knowledge communication has been defined. This perspective includes such characteristics as novelty and relevante; i.e., it refers to the process of knowledge transformation, and particularly to selection and interpretation within a specific context. The discussion leads to the questions of why and when this meaning was designated with the word information. We will explore this history, and we believe that our results may help readers better understand the complexity of the concept with regard to its scientific definitions.
Discussions about the concept of information in other disciplines are very important for IS because many theories and approaches in IS have their origins elsewhere (see the section "Information as an Interdisciplinary Concept" in this chapter). The epistemological concept of information brings into play nonhuman information processes, particularly in physics and biology. And vice versa: the psychic and sociological processes of selection and interpretation may be considered using objective parameters, leaving aside the semantic dimension, or more precisely, by considering objective or situational parameters of interpretation. This concept can be illustrated also in physical terms with regard to release mechanisms, as we suggest. Our overview of the concept of information in the natural sciences as well as in the humanities and social sciences cannot hope to be comprehensive. In most cases, we can refer only to fragments of theories. However, the reader may wish to follow the leads provided in the bibliography. Readers interested primarily in information science may derive most benefit from the section an "Information in Information Science," in which we offer a detailed explanation of diverse views and theories of information within our field; supplementing the recent ARIST chapter by Cornelius (2002). We show that the introduction of the concept of information circa 1950 to the domain of special librarianship and documentation has in itself had serious consequences for the types of knowledge and theories developed in our field. The important question is not only what meaning we give the term in IS, but also how it relates to other basic terms, such as documents, texts, and knowledge. Starting with an objectivist view from the world of information theory and cybernetics, information science has turned to the phenomena of relevance and interpretation as basic aspects of the concept of information. This change is in no way a turn to a subjectivist theory, but an appraisal of different perspectives that may determine in a particular context what is being considered as informative, be it a "thing" (Buckland, 1991b) or a document. Different concepts of information within information science reflect tensions between a subjective and an objective approach. The concept of interpretation or selection may be considered to be the bridge between these two poles. It is important, however, to consider the different professions involved with the interpretation and selection of knowledge. The most important thing in IS (as in information policy) is to consider information as a constitutive forte in society and, thus, recognize the teleological nature of information systems and services (Braman, 1989).

Source

Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.343-411

0.0077671995 = product of:
  0.031068798 = sum of:
    0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 1330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015619429 = score(doc=1330,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 1330, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1330)
    0.01544937 = product of:
      0.03089874 = sum of:
        0.03089874 = weight(_text_:on in 1330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03089874 = score(doc=1330,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 1330, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1330)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

0.0056879534 = product of:
  0.022751814 = sum of:
    0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 3382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013388081 = score(doc=3382,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 3382, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3382)
    0.009363732 = product of:
      0.018727465 = sum of:
        0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 3382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018727465 = score(doc=3382,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 3382, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3382)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

The first aim is to provide well-articulated concepts by thinking through elementary phenomena of today's world, focusing on privacy and the digital, to clarify who we are in the cyberworld - hence a phenomenology of digital whoness. The second aim is to engage critically, hermeneutically with older and current literature on privacy, including in today's emerging cyberworld. Phenomenological results include concepts of i) self-identity through interplay with the world, ii) personal privacy in contradistinction to the privacy of private property, iii) the cyberworld as an artificial, digital dimension in order to discuss iv) what freedom in the cyberworld can mean, whilst not neglecting v) intercultural aspects and vi) the EU context.

0.0035005887 = product of:
  0.02800471 = sum of:
    0.02800471 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02800471 = score(doc=3613,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.22419426 = fieldWeight in 3613, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3613)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Die gegenwärtig modernste Methode zur Verarbeitung, Speicherung, Wiederfindung und Verbreitung von (schriftlich) fixierten Fachinformationen, nämlich das "Information Retrieval", wirft eine Reihe von Fragen auf, die in der philosophischen Diskussion unter die Rubrik "Hermeneutik" fallen. Die Hermeneutik befaßt sich mit dem Verstehen und sie hat, bevor sie zu einer allgemeinen bzw. philosophischen Hermeneutik entwickelt wurde, diese Fragen in Zusammenhang mit der Interpretation von "klassischen" Texten (insbesondere theologischen, aber auch literarischen, juristischen usw.) eingehend thematisiert: aus den Fragen, die z.B. die Interpretation von juristischen Texten aufwarf, entwickelte sich eine juristische Hermeneutik usw. Von hier aus ist es verständlich, daß, wann immer die Auseinandersetzung mit dem schriftlich Fixierten im Mittelpunkt steht, eine dem jeweiligen Textinhalt entsprechende Hermeneutik entsteht, wobei es unwichtig ist, ob die behandelten hermeneutischen Fragen ausdrücklich unter diesem Namen erörtert werden oder nicht. Sammlung, Auswertung, Verarbeitung, Speicherung, Wiederfindung, Vermittlung und Nutzung von Fachinformationen weisen auf eine lange Geschichte hin, die aber nicht Gegenstand dieser Untersuchungen ist.[1] Unser sogenanntes Informationszeitalter kann u.a. als solches mit Recht gekennzeichnet werden, nicht weil es so etwas wie Information oder Fachinformation in früheren Epochen nicht gab, sondern weil diese Sachverhalte in unserer Zeit besonders 'frag-würdig' geworden sind. Der Verlust an Selbstverständlichkeit ist das Kennzeichen einer hermeneutischen, d.h. interpretationsbedürftigen Situation. Fachinformation als hermeneutische Frage? Das betrifft die Frage nach ihrem Verstehen und unser Selbstverständnis.
Im dritten Teil schließlich werden jene hermeneutischen Fragen aufgeworfen, die sich in Zusammenhang mit dem Information Retrieval, d.h. mit der Speicherung und Wiedergewinnung von Fachinformationen aus dem Computer, stellen. Diese Beiträge zur Hermeneutik des Information Retrieval erfolgen vorwiegend am Beispiel der bibliographischen Datenbasen. Dabei wird auch die Tragweite unseres Ansatzes im Hinblick auf andere Möglichkeiten der elektronischen Informationsspeicherung und -wiedergewinnung zum Ausdruck kommen. Die Erörterung des Information Retrieval als Beitrag zur Sozialisation der Fachinformation beschließt diese Untersuchungen. Der besondere Charakter einer Hermeneutik der Fachinformation, zu deren Kern zweifellos gegenwärtig die sich aus dem Information Retrieval ergebenden Fragen gehören, kann folgendermaßen hervorgehoben werden: Es geht um das Verstehen im Sinne einer Grundstruktur des Mensch-seins. Von hier aus soll der Zusammenhang der zwischenmenschlichen Kommunikation, insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Vermittlung von schriftlich fixiertem Wissen bzw. von Texten erläutert werden. Es geht also bei dieser Hermeneutik weder um das Verstehen von Naturerscheinungen noch von geschichtlichen Ereignissen. Ferner, und im Unterschied zu anderen Hermeneutiken, die sich auch mit dem Verstehen von Texten befassen und sich dabei z.B. auf ein bestimmtes Gebiet beschränken, geht es hier um fachliche Texte in einem umfassenden Sinne. Schließlich werden diese Texte, ihrem ursprünglichen Mitteilungscharakter entsprechend, als Fachinformation verstanden. Als besondere Problematik des Verstehens von Fachinformationen stellt sich hier nicht so sehr die Frage nach dem Verstehen von gedruckten Texten, wie es bisher die "Texthermeneutiken" getan haben, sondern die nach dem Verstehen von im Computer gespeicherten Fachinformationen. In unserer Darstellung werden wir exemplarisch auf die hermeneutischen Fragen, die sich im Falle von bibliographischen Datenbasen stellen, eingehen. Die Schnittmengen aus diesen unterschiedlichen Sachverhalten bilden das Ziel und die Grenze dieser Untersuchungen.

0.002231347 = product of:
  0.017850775 = sum of:
    0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 1331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017850775 = score(doc=1331,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 1331, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1331)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

0.0013945919 = product of:
  0.011156735 = sum of:
    0.011156735 = weight(_text_:of in 2444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011156735 = score(doc=2444,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 2444, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2444)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Rafael Capurro ist Professor für Informationswissenschaft und Informationsethik an der FH Stuttgart und Chefredakteur der OnlineZeitschrift "International Journal of Information Ethics". In folgendem Artikel greift er die aktuelle Diskussion um die Wissensgesellschaft auf und beschäftigt sich mit der Informationsethik, die unter anderem die Entwicklung moralischen Verhaltens im Internet beobachten soll.