Is there any difference between information and information or is
information something neutral or at least something
valuable for somebody and in that case valuable? What is the difference
between an information society and a
knowledge society?
Jan
Kevil, L H. skrev:
> Another cavilling datum: let's not forget French: des informations, une donnée, des données. Since we are sailing in rather murky waters, let's keep in mind that we are perforce using specialized vocabulary. Explaining the nuances in what we write is a major part of our job.
>
> Bernhard, I always enjoy your posts.
>
> Hunter
>
> L. Hunter Kevil, Ph.D.
> Collection Development Librarian
> University of Missouri Libraries
> 573-884-8760
> kevill_at_missouri.edu
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of B.G. Sloan
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 9:41 AM
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Knowledge vs. Information [was: Problems With Selection in Today's Information World]
>
> Bernhard Eversberg said:
>
> "...the view of information as a process is not only the original (ancient) one, it is in keeping with the fact that "information" has no plural whereas "data", as well as "news", has no singular."
>
> Maybe it's my five years of heavy-duty Latin studies in the seminary, but isn't "datum" the singular form of "data"? :-)
>
> Bernie Sloan
>
> --- On Fri, 7/2/10, Bernhard Eversberg <ev_at_BIBLIO.TU-BS.DE> wrote:
>
>
> From: Bernhard Eversberg <ev_at_BIBLIO.TU-BS.DE>
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Knowledge vs. Information [was: Problems With Selection in Today's Information World]
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Date: Friday, July 2, 2010, 2:28 AM
>
>
> B.G. Sloan wrote:
>
>> I mostly agree with the points that Stephen McDonald makes, but
>> couldn't one also make the case that most of the information in
>> libraries is *recorded* knowledge?
>>
>>
>
> Rather, records *resulting from* knowledge. The knowledge itself remains
> in the head of the person doing the recording. Out of one body of
> individual knowledge, myriads different records can emerge, every one
> and even the sum of them always incomplete. Knowledge, essentially,
> cannot be mapped 1:1 on paper or into files. And always, it is part of a
> much larger context that does not get recorded with it but is
> essential for the records to be meaningful. So, *recorded knowledge*
> is shorthand, but with the potential to mislead.
>
> Records are data, not information. We should get away from using
> the two as synonyms. The same data that informs one person can be
> meaningless for the next.
>
> Information is what *happens*, it is a process, when a person reads the
> data. That person has to be able to read, to decipher the script and to
> understand the language and the wording of the text, and then some
> grasp of the original context as well, no small prerequisites! As long
> as this doesn't happen, there's only data with a *potential* to
> inform.
>
> Libraries have always helped people with the process of informing
> themselves, they are not dispensing information, let alone knowledge,
> but data. They can empower people in the process of doing useful
> things with data, the process eventually resulting in some knowledge,
> always in a new and different and individual context.
>
> Besides, the view of information as a process is not only the original
> (ancient) one, it is in keeping with the fact that "information" has no
> plural whereas "data", as well as "news", has no singular.
>
> B.Eversberg
>
>
>
>
>
--
De åsikter som framförs här är mina personliga
och inte ett uttryck för Göteborgs universitets-
biblioteks hållning
Opinions expressed here are my own and not
those of the Gothenburg University Library
Jan Szczepanski
Förste bibliotekarie
Goteborgs universitetsbibliotek
Box 222
SE 405 30 Goteborg, SWEDEN
Tel: +46 31 7861164 Fax: +46 31 163797
E-mail: Jan.Szczepanski_at_ub.gu.se
Received on Mon Jul 05 2010 - 01:53:57 EDT