From the invalidity of a General Classification Theory to a new organization of knowledge for the millennium to come (original) (raw)
Foundational, First-Order, and Second-Order Classification Theory
Both basic and applied research on the construction, implementation, maintenance, and evaluation of classification schemes is called classification theory. If we employ Ritzer’s metatheoretical method of analysis on the over one-hundred year-old body of literature, we can see categories of theory emerge. This paper looks at one particular part of knowledge organization work, namely classification theory, and asks 1) what are the contours of this intellectual space, and, 2) what have we produced in the theoretical reflection on constructing, implementing, and evaluating classification schemes? The preliminary findings from this work are that classification theory can be separated into three kinds: foundational classification theory, first-order classification theory, and second-order classification theory, each with its own concerns and objects of study.
The idea of organizing knowledge and the determinism in classifícation structures implicitly involve certain limits which are translated into a General Theory on the Classifícation of Knowledge, given that classifícation responds to specific parameters and structures more than to a theoretical concept. The classifícation of things is a refiection of their classifícation by man, and this is what determines classifícation structures. The classifícation and organization of knowledge are presented to us as an artificial construct or as a useful fiction elaborated by man.
Theories of knowledge organization — theories of knowledge
Any ontological theory commits us to accept and classify a number of phenomena in a more or less specific way – and vice versa: a classification tends to reveal the theoretical outlook of its creator. Objects and their descriptions and relations are not just “given” but determined by theories. Knowledge is fallible and consensus is rare. By implication, knowledge organization has to consider different theories/views and their foundations. Bibliographical classifications depend on subject knowledge and on the same theories as corresponding scientific and scholarly classifications. Some classifications are based on logical distinctions, others on empirical examinations, and some on mappings of common ancestors or on establishing functional criteria. To evaluate a classification is to involve oneself in the research which has produced the given classification. Because research is always based more or less on specific epistemological ideals (e.g. empiricism, rationalism, historicism or pragmatism), the evaluation of classification includes the evaluation of the epistemological foundations of the research on which given classifications have been based. The field of knowledge organization itself is based on different approaches and traditions such as user-based and cognitive views, facet-analytical views, numeric taxonomic approaches, bibliometrics and domain-analytic approaches. These approaches and traditions are again connected to epistemological views, which have to be considered. Only the domain-analytic view is fully committed to exploring knowledge organization in the light of subject knowledge and substantial scholarly theories.
Classification Schemes of Information Science: Twenty-Eight Scholars Map the Field
Journal of the American Society for Information …, 2007
The field of Information Science is constantly changing. Therefore, information scientists are required to regu-larly reviewand if necessaryredefine its fundamental building blocks. This article is one of a group of four articles, which resulted from a Critical Delphi study ...
Categories in Knowledge Organization
The categorial approach was formulated by Ranganathan in the 1930s in his Colon Classification and its conceptual and theoretical basis was laid down in his Prolegomena. This view influenced significantly the search for a new approach to knowledge organization that would overcome the rigidity and limitations of enumerative models. The categorical approach or the facet-analytical approach has since become the single most predominant approach in knowledge organization leading to the development of a number of special classification schemes for micro-subjects, new general classification schemes such as BSO (and revision of existing schemes, e.g. BC2), indexing systems such as PRECIS and POPSI, revision and / or development of controlled vocabularies to conform to the faceted approach, emergence of new tools such as the Thesaurofacet and Classaurus, and in recent years, facet analysis has even been used in website design. This paper explores some schemas and raises a few questions as to the relevance of these in the digital environment.
DECLASSIFYING KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION
KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION 41, 5, 2014
Classification, as is common knowledge, is simultaneously an operation (classer) and an instrument of knowledge organization (classifier), regardless of more technical or specific designations used in that area of research, although an operation that ‘naturally’ transcends the very realm of knowledge organization (KO) to which it descended from the logos. In this text, a summary of more than 35 years of work, the author presents a series of hypothesis and itineraries of declassified thought, a way of thinking based on strategies of reflexivity and pluralism that buttress the automatic, hierarchical and essentialist tendencies enhanced by totalitarian mind, whether this be harsh or subtle, which are imposed by all levels of power in order to re-orientate them towards civic commitment, re-politicization of KO practices that were never depoliticized. Declassification is a hermeneutics of KO that recuperates criticism, rhetoric, reflection, emotions, affection and even contradiction as the cornerstones of systematic knowledge production processes. The world is not only full of heterogeneous knowledge but also heterogeneous forms of knowing that must be restored and deliberated upon on an equal basis. That is the aim of declassification on putting forward an open and alternative interpretation of rethinking and practising identity, culture, memory or social sciences and KO, particularly in the new digital space of unlimited interaction.
A new paradigm in the organization of knowledge
Futures, 1994
The contemporary situation of knowledge points to a change in paradigm, if looked at from the perspective of a confluence of its essential elements, instead of as a dispersion of its often incongruous developments. The novelty comes from the emergence of the non-material order in the area of the material paradigm, for which it substitutes-only in this sense can one speak of substitution here-as an ordering paradigm of knowledge and of its transmission and circulation. Since the main models of the organization of the fields of knowledge suggested in the past century and a half were inspired by a material/energy matrix of science, we propose an alternative model strategically more adapted to the present situation and heuristically more interesting for the analysis of its problems.
Classifications and concepts: towards an elementary theory of knowledge interaction
Journal of Documentation, 2013
PurposeThis paper seeks to outline the central role of concepts in the knowledge universe, and the intertwining roles of works, instantiations, and documents. In particular the authors are interested in ontological and epistemological aspects of concepts and in the question to which extent there is a need for natural languages to link concepts to create meaningful patterns.Design/methodology/approachThe authors describe the quest for the smallest elements of knowledge from a historical perspective. They focus on the metaphor of the universe of knowledge and its impact on classification and retrieval of concepts. They outline the major components of an elementary theory of knowledge interaction.FindingsThe paper outlines the major components of an elementary theory of knowledge interaction that is based on the structure of knowledge rather than on the content of documents, in which semantics becomes not a matter of synonymous concepts, but rather of coordinating knowledge structures....
The representation of knowledge in library classification schemes
Knowledge organization, 2001
Foucault began ‘The Order of Things’ by quoting a passage from Borges, on the monstrous classification of animals in ‘a certain Chinese encyclopaedia’. In this monstrous classification: ‘animals are divided into: (a) belonging to the Emperor, (b) embalmed, (c) tame, (d) sucking pigs, (e) sirens, (f) fabulous, (g) stray dogs, (h) included in the present classification. (i) frenzied, (j) innumerable, (k) drawn with a very fine camelhair brush, (l) et cetera, (m) having just broken the water pitcher, (n) that from a long way off look like flies.’ In the wonderment of this taxonomy, the thing we apprehend in one great leap, the thing that, by means of the fable, is demonstrated as the exotic charm of another system of thought, is the limitation of our own, the stark impossibility of thinking that.’ (Foucault, 1974, p. xv) Foucault argued that within this taxonomy what really ‘transgresses the boundaries of all imagination, of all possible thought, is simply that alphabetical series (a, b, c, d) which links each of these categories to all the others.’ (Foucault, 1974, p. xvi) The use of the alphabetical symbols suggests that relationships exist or should exist between the categories thus linked. For Foucault the other 'monstrous quality’ running through Borges’ taxonomy is the fact that these categories could only exist in and through language. They could not be juxtaposed in any other sense, in any other place, in any material site. Borges’ monstrous encyclopaedic classification is an important starting point for Foucault in his investigations into the historical contingency of discourses of order, power and control. Foucault’s investigations of the operations of power through localised institutions and practices are the starting point of this paper which explores the order and juxtaposition of ideal concepts through the discursive practice of classification schemes.
ON TRIPLET CLASSIFICATIONS OF CONCEPTS
The scheme for classifications of concepts is introduced. It has founded on the triplet model of concepts. In this model a concept is depicted by means of three kinds of knowledge: a concept base, a concept representing part and the linkage between them. The idea of triplet classifications of concepts is connected with a usage of various specifications of these knowledge kinds as classification criteria.
The rise of ontologies or the reinvention of classification
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1999
Classifications/ontologies, thesauri, and dictionaries serve many functions, which are summarized in this note. As a result of this multiplicity of functions, classificationsoften called ontologies -are developed in many communities of research and practice. Unfortunately, there is little communication and mutual learning; thus, efforts are fragmented, resulting in considerable reinvention and less than optimal products. Soergel, D. (1999). The rise of ontologies or the reinvention of classification.
Towards an epistemic-logical theory of categorization
HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), 2017
Categorization systems are widely studied in psychology, sociology, and organization theory as information-structuring devices which are critical to decision-making processes. In the present paper, we introduce a sound and complete epistemic logic of categories and agents' categorical perception. The Kripke-style semantics of this logic is given in terms of data structures based on two domains: one domain representing objects (e.g. market products) and one domain representing the features of the objects which are relevant to the agents' decision-making. We use this framework to discuss and propose logic-based formalizations of some core concepts from psychological, sociological, and organizational research in categorization theory. CCS CONCEPTS • General and reference → General conference proceedings; • Information systems → Relational database model; • Theory of computation → Modal and temporal logics; Logic and databases; • Computing methodologies → Knowledge representation and reasoning; Nonmonotonic, default reasoning and belief revision; Reasoning about belief and knowledge; • Applied computing → Consumer products; Marketing;
Knowledge Organization for a Sustainable World: Challenges and Perspectives for Cultural, Scientific, and Technological Sharing in a Connected Society, 2016
The paper provides an overview of natural science classification scheme development with major control of classification criteria presented in the Linnaean taxonomy. Based on natural laws, the Linnaean taxonomy has been accepted worldwide. Unlike the indexing of the natural sciences items that follows the logic and systematics of natural laws-a real challenge still exists in classification of documents originating from human intellectual activity.Items, produced as a human output are a particular phenomenon and as such, follow no common rules. This lack of evident natural law as a basis for a common classification can be substituted by practices of facet classifications and Information Coding Classification (ICC) [1] that advances to the field of classifying literature. Their common feature is to analyse the information content with a set of categorical questions and to express the answers in exact terms, concepts and notations. The ensuing categorizations are certainly both concise and unequivocal: essentially Linnaean, or better!
Towards a General Theory of Classifications
2013
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 2006
The AI system NARS contains a categorization model, in the sense that categorization and reasoning are two aspects of the same mechanism. As a theory of categorization, the NARS model unifies several existing theories. In this paper, the logic used in NARS is briefly described, and the categorization model is compared with the others. Non-Axiomatic Reasoning System (NARS) Under the length limitation of the paper, this paper only gives a brief introduction to the most relevant aspects of NARS. For publications and an on-line demo of NARS, see http://www.cogsci.indiana.edu/farg/peiwang/papers.html.
The Influence of Classification on World View and Epistemology
Proceedings of the 2008 InSITE Conference, 2008
Worldview as a kind of man's look towards the world of reality has a severe influence on his classification of knowledge. In other words one may see in classification of knowledge the unity as well as plurality. This article deals with the fact that how classification takes place in man's epistemological process. Perception and epistemology are mentioned as the key points here. Philosophers are usually classifiers and their point of views forms the way they classify things and concepts. Relationship and how one looks at it in shaping the classification scheme is critical. The classifications which have been introduced up to now have had several models. They represent the kind of looking at, or point of view of their founders to the world. Aristotle, as a philosopher as well as an encyclopedist, is one of the great founders of knowledge classification. Afterwards the Islamic scholars followed him while some few rejected his model and made some new ones. If we divide all class...
Ranganathan's layers of classification theory and the FASDA model of classification
Proceedings of the 2011 North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization, 2011
Describes four waves of Ranganathan’s dynamic theory of classification. Outlines components that distinguish each wave, and proposes ways in which this understanding can inform systems design in the contemporary environment, particularly with regard to interoperability and scheme versioning. Ends with an appeal to better understanding the relationship between structure and semantics in faceted classification schemes and similar indexing languages.