<div dir="ltr">Hi, Howard.<div>Answering your question "hb: i'm a newcomer to these discussions. what is the fourth great domain of science?" Might be useful also for who came in the FIS list after 2015 IS4IS Summit. </div><div>The last discussion before the conference, was "A Dialog on the Informational as the 4th Great Domain of Science". A copy of the post is in the end of this message.</div><div>Based on a Pedros's paper and Rosenbloom's book we propose that all scientific disciplines could be a combination of 4 great scientific domains. We are looking for a method to verify that the informational is the 4th great domain. Maybe Loet's Maps of Science should be a good approach.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div><br></div><div>Moisés</div><div><br></div><div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Moisés André Nisenbaum<br>Doutorando IBICT/UFRJ. Professor. Msc.<br>Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro - IFRJ<br>Campus Maracanã<br><a href="mailto:moises.nisenbaum@ifrj.edu.br" target="_blank">moises.nisenbaum@ifrj.edu.br</a></div></div></div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div align="center" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="EN-US"><big><b>A Dialog on the Informational as the 4th Great Domain of Science</b></big><u></u><u></u></span><br><span lang="EN-US"><b>Moisés André Nisenbaum & Ken Herold</b></span><br><span lang="EN-US"></span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span><b><i><span lang="EN-US">PART 1: </span></i></b><small><span lang="EN-US"><big><b><i>Informational as the 4th Great Domain of Science</i></b><br></big></span></small><span lang="EN-US">(Moisés André Nisenbaum)<br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="EN-US">To classify is human (BOWKER & STAR 2000). The organization of scientific knowledge is concern of scientists long ago. It started as a matter of librarianship and has evolved over time using various tools like enumerative classification, faceted classification, universal classification, controlled vocabulary, thesaurus, ontologies, Semantic Web. But how Information Science should organize scientific knowledge taking into account the dynamic behavior of disciplines and multi, inter and trans-disciplinary science of the twenty-first century (Information Society)?<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="EN-US">Rosenbloom (2012) proposed a model in which four great Scientific Domains - Physical (P) Life (L), social (S) and Computing (C) - can be</span><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="http://moisesandre.com.br/FIS/debate/images/rosembloom-figure-2.1-domains-composing-disciplines.jpg" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">combined to form any discipline</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US">. The first three (P, L and S) are "well known" domains and he proposes that the 4th is Computing. The small number of domains (compared with 10 of DDC and UDC) is offset by </span><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="http://moisesandre.com.br/FIS/debate/images/Rosenbloom-figure-2.9-relationships.jpg" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">dynamic</span></a></span><span lang="PT-BR"> </span><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="http://moisesandre.com.br/FIS/debate/images/Rosenbloom-figure-2.2-domains-simple-relations.jpg" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">relationships</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US"> between domains that can be written by </span><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="http://moisesandre.com.br/FIS/debate/images/Rosenbloom-table-2.1-ME-Language.jpg" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">Metascience Expression Language</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US">. Although the prerequisites of a Great Scientific Domain has been well developed, Rosenbloom does not explain why they are in number of four or why these specific four domains.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="EN-US">NAVARRO, MORAL and Marijuan (2013) propose that the 4th Great Scientific Domain is the Informational (I) instead of Computing. However, the biggest proposal is that the Information Science needs to be rethought to support theoretically and methodologically this 4th Great Scientific Domain. At the end of the article, the authors </span><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="http://moisesandre.com.br/FIS/debate/images/Map-Pedro.jpg" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">propose the insertion of the four Great Scientific Domains</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US"> in High-Resolution </span><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="http://moisesandre.com.br/FIS/debate/images/Map-Bollen.jpg" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">Map of Sciences (Bollen at all, 2009)</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="EN-US">The problem is that all this is still in its "philosophical field" and miss a more pragmatic approach. When I observed this map, I just thought about how to measure these four domains and, even without even knowing exactly how to do this, I asked Bollen the raw data of his research. My initial idea was to identify every scientific discipline by a mathematical entity, for example a digital 4x4 matrix representing quantitatively the four Great Scientific Domain components and their relationships. The problem how to establish the criteria (bibliometric) that would define the matrix elements. Once created, we can check if the matrices really come together as expected.<br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">Best,<br>Moisés<br><span lang="EN-US"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="EN-US"><i>References:</i><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="https://books.google.com.br/books?id=xHlP8WqzizYC&lpg=PR9&ots=Mz3xtCt2nE&dq=Sorting%20things%20out%3A%20Classification%20and%20its%20consequences.%20&lr&hl=pt-BR&pg=PR9#v=onepage&q=Sorting%20things%20out:%20Classification%20and%20its%20consequences.&f=false" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">BOWKER, Geoffrey C.; STAR, Susan Leigh. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. MIT press, 2000.</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="https://books.google.com.br/books?id=WGfxkn8OkwAC&lpg=PP1&dq=On%20computing%3A%20the%20fourth%20great%20scientific%20domain.%20google%20books&hl=pt-BR&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=On%20computing:%20the%20fourth%20great%20scientific%20domain.%20google%20books&f=false" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">ROSENBLOOM, Paul S. On computing: the fourth great scientific domain. </span>MIT Press, 2012.</a></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="http://moisesandre.com.br/FIS/debate/articles/pedro-article.pdf" target="_blank">NAVARRO, Jorge; MORAL, Raquel del; MARIJUÁN, Pedro C.. <span lang="EN-US">The uprising of informational: towards a new way of thinking Information Science. Presented at 1st International Conference in China on the Philosophy of Information, Xi’an, China, 18 October 2013.</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span lang="PT-BR"><a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0004803" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">BOLLEN, Johan et al. Clickstream data yields high-resolution maps of science. PLoS One, v. 4, n. 3, p. e4803, 2009.</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US"><u></u><u></u></span></p><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><b><i><br>PART 2: Comments from Ken Herold</i></b><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">I appear to be a fringe observer of the history of information science from within my professional (since 1984) domain of librarianship and information studies. [1] For a broader example, Chaim Zins conducted a multi-year study of information science internationally from 2003-2005. [2] My own edited works [3] in 2004 and 2015 reprise various works going back to Machlup from 1962 [4].</div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">I am somewhat skeptical of the suggestion that recombining knowledge is new or previously critically not examined. The international documentation movement, predecessor to information science, has been shown by Buckland and Rayward [5] among others to be exactly the rich response to the global growth of knowledge 100 years ago. Bioinformatics should and does clarify and extend our perspectives, but I hesitate to accept its equivalence with von Neumann architecture or cultural heritage. Nevertheless, all the right questions are being asked in my opinion.</div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">Rosenbloom's interminable references to Wikipedia are off-putting, I am afraid. Also, he takes a rather narrow historical view of information science in chapter 1. Again, the trend seems correct to me as to the importance of computing. I just do not place as much value on an ad hoc relational approach with few links to the massive peer-reviewed literature available. <br><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">I suppose I could best serve as the devil's advocate in this round? </div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Sincerely,</div><div class="gmail_quote">Ken</div><div class="gmail_quote"><i><br></i></div><div class="gmail_quote"><i><span lang="EN-US">References:</span></i></div><div class="gmail_quote"><br>[1]<a href="https://www.asist.org/?s=history+of+information+science" target="_blank"> https://www.asist.org/?s=history+of+information+science</a><br><div dir="ltr"><div><a href="http://www.uff.br/ppgci/editais/historyofis.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.uff.br/ppgci/editais/historyofis.pdf</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>[2]<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.20505/abstract" target="_blank"> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.20505/abstract</a> <br></div><div><br></div><div>[3]<a href="https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/1034" target="_blank"> https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/1034</a> <br></div><div><a href="http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/toc/lib.63.3.html" target="_blank">http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/toc/lib.63.3.html</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>[4]<a href="https://archive.org/details/productiondistri00mach" target="_blank"> https://archive.org/details/productiondistri00mach</a><br></div><div><a href="http://philpapers.org/rec/MACTSO-9" target="_blank">http://philpapers.org/rec/MACTSO-9</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>[5]<a href="http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~buckland/otlet.html" target="_blank"> http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~buckland/otlet.html</a><br></div><div><a href="http://people.lis.illinois.edu/~wrayward/otlet/otletpage.htm" target="_blank">http://people.lis.illinois.edu/~wrayward/otlet/otletpage.htm</a></div></div></div></div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Moisés André Nisenbaum<br>Doutorando IBICT/UFRJ. Professor. Msc.<br>Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro - IFRJ<br>Campus Maracanã<br><a href="mailto:moises.nisenbaum@ifrj.edu.br" target="_blank">moises.nisenbaum@ifrj.edu.br</a></div></div></div></div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"><big><big><br>
<br>
</big></big><br>
<a href="mailto:HowlBloom@aol.com" target="_blank">HowlBloom@aol.com</a> wrote:
<blockquote cite="http://mid86241.186776b4.42b35a1e@aol.com" type="cite">
<font color="#000000" face="Verdana" size="2">
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<div>
<div><span class="">
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">In a message dated 6/17/2015 8:30:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight
Time, <a href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es" target="_blank">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a> writes:</font></div>
</span><blockquote style="padding-left:10px;margin-left:10px"><span class="">
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Arial" size="2">Dear
Steven and FIS Colleagues,<br>
<br>
Your message has arrived to the list perfectly: fears are unjustified. <br>
There is no censorship in this list --and never will be any (well, as <br>
the movie tells "never say never again"!). Anyhow, I would
dis-dramatize <br>
the discussion. The Vienna conference has been very exciting and full
of <br>
oral discussions that somehow continue now. Quite many of those good <br>
ideas have been rediscussed in the exchanges of these days. However,
for <br>
my taste, the essential connection between information and life has not
<br>
properly surfaced yet.</font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
</span><div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)" face="Verdana">hb. have you seen Guenther Witzak's When Competing
Viruses Unify or my book The God Problem: How a Godless Cosmos
Creates? both have clues to the relationship between information and
life. mere clues. but a good start.</font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Arial" size="2"><span class=""> The
explosion of complexity in the living and the <br>
explosion of complexity in modern societies is clearly depending on <br>
information and communication flows (or whatever we may denominate). <br>
Comparatively with the complexity of merely physical systems, there is <br>
no point about that. Apart from following the physics, most of the <br>
alternative approaches so far discussed go for the discursive, <br>
conceptual domain as the place where information should be <br></span>
ascertained... What if information belongs to action,</font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)" face="Verdana">hb: good question. what is the relationship between
information and action? what is the relationship between stimulus and
response? another topic in The God Problem.</font></font></div><span class="">
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Arial" size="2"> to
the adaptive <br>
changes arranged by the living and socioeconomic agents, to the <br>
tentative advancement of their life cycles, to the difficult
achievement <br>
of their fitness in an ever changing environment as communicating <br>
members of bigger entities and societies... then we are leaving that <br>
action track of life just as a fragmented scenario of multiple <br>
specialized points of view--or tying it unpropery. As Goethe put in <br>
Faust "At the beginning was the deed" Helas not the Verb!<br>
<br>
In Vienna I agreed with Marcin's pragmatic approach to the "liquidity" <br>
of information. Maybe it is too long to argue, and sure he can do
better <br>
than me. But getting to terms with the factic undefinability of the
term <br>
may help quite a bit to the practice of information science research by
<br>
people with empirical and naturalistic orientation. </font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
</span><div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)" face="Verdana">hb: from The God Problem: "<span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;line-height:200%">information
is anything that a receiver can decode.<span> </span>Information
is anything a receiver can translate.<span> </span>Information
is anything that a reciever can understand.<span> </span>Information
is in the eyes of the beholder.</span>" how do we know when
information has hit home? stimulus and response. action. the verb.</font></font></div><span class="">
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Arial" size="2">One
should not feel <br>
forced to define a fundamental concept (on a pair with "time" and <br>
"space"--basic forms of information indeed) </font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
</span><div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)" face="Verdana">hb: this is intriguing. how do you interpret time and
space as information? they do tell particles where to go. and
particles respond by moving. is that it?</font></font></div><span class="">
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Arial" size="2">plus
a cohort of other <br>
"impossible" related terms (meaning, knowledge, intelligence)</font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
</span><div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font color="#000000" face="Verdana" size="2"><font style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)">hb: from the god problem
re the meaning of meaning: "<span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">If meaning
is anything that a receiver can understand, if meaning is anything that
an entity can interpret, if meaning is in the eye of the beholder, then
how do you know when a thing or a person “understands” something?
Follow the B.F. Skinner rule.<span> </span>Watch his or her
behavior.<span> </span>Watch for the signs of stimulus and
response.<span> </span>Watch to<span> </span>see
if the receiver does something in response to the stimulus.<span> </span>Watch to see if the receiver moves.<span>
</span>Quarks exchange meaning with stimulus and response.<span> </span>So do gas whisps competing to swallow each other.<span> </span>And so do would-be planets using their gravity to
snag and cannibalize comets and space debris.<span> </span>How
do we know the receivers get the meaning?<span> </span>All
of them respond to the signals they receive.<span> </span>They
move.<span> </span>They move toward each other."</span></font></font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font color="#000000" face="Verdana" size="2"><font style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></font></font> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font color="#000000" face="Verdana" size="2"><font style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">one more
word. from the work of Valerius Geist, author of Life Strategies. all
communication comes down to two elements: attraction cues and repulsion
cues.</span></font></font></font></div><span class="">
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Verdana" size="2"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></font> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Arial" size="2"> in
order <br>
to practice good info science research. Acknowledging that, could be a <br>
first step to achieve a consensus on some basic principles of <br>
information science that would allow the disciplinary construction and <br>
all the multiple diversity within. It will take time and patience. So, <br>
our "market of conceptual exchange" should continue unabated. <br>
Particularly, continuing the debate on the 4 th Great Domain of Science
<br>
can help us to have a big picture where our more immediate, particular <br>
goals might one day dovetail.</font></font></div>
</span></blockquote>
<blockquote style="padding-left:10px;margin-left:10px">
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)" face="Verdana">hb: i'm a
newcomer to these discussions. what is the fourth great domain of
science?</font></font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"> </font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2">
</font>
<div><font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Arial" size="2"><font face="Verdana">with warmth and oomph--howard</font></font></font></div>
<font face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></font></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</font></blockquote><span class="">
<pre cols="72"><br></pre></span></div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><br>
</div></div>