Search results

This article aims to explore anticipation from an ontological point of view and to analyze in particular some of Nicolai Hartmann's ideas.

The paper presents a conceptual analysis of an ontological theory of anticipation.

Analyzing philosophical problems related to “futures” and “anticipation”, to the framework of modal categories, and connecting Hartmann with Ludwig von Bertalanffy and comparing the outcome with some Artistotelian theses, offers a philosophical perspective on futures studies.

The “human” phenomenon of anticipation will be defined as possibly the only form of authentic anticipation, interpreted as a teleological act.

The result is obtained through the distinction, articulated for each level of reality, among different kinds of determination.

The current debate between two theoretical approaches in library and information science and knowledge organization (KO), the cognitive one and the sociological one, is addressed in view of their possible integration in a more general model. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Personal knowledge of individual users, as focused in the cognitive approach, and social production and use of knowledge, as focused in the sociological approach, are reconnected to the theory of levels of reality, particularly in the versions of Nicolai Hartmann and Karl R. Popper (three worlds). The notions of artefact and mentefact, as proposed in anthropological literature and applied in some KO systems, are also examined as further contributions to the generalized framework. Some criticisms to these models are reviewed and discussed.

Both the cognitive approach and the sociological approach, if taken in isolation, prove to be cases of philosophical monism as they emphasize a single level over the others. On the other hand, each of them can be considered as a component of a pluralist ontology and epistemology, where individual minds and social communities are but two successive levels in knowledge production and use, and are followed by a further level of “objectivated spirit”; this can in turn be analyzed into artefacts and mentefacts. While all these levels are relevant to information science, mentefacts and their properties are its most peculiar objects of study, which make it distinct from such other disciplines as psychology and sociology.

This analysis shows how existing approaches can benefit from additional notions contributed by levels theory, to develop more complete and accurate models of information and knowledge phenomena.

The purpose of this paper is to explain why finding a theory for futures studies is such a demanding task. In particular, the paper paves the way towards a theoretical framework that goes beyond both positivism and anti‐positivism.

The paper discusses a network of mutually interlinked concepts, including: levels of reality; parts and wholes; causation; the multiplicity of times; anticipation; the thick present; and latents.

The paper presents the two main obstructions blocking the way towards a theory for futures studies (namely, the belief that the opposition between positivists and anti‐positivists is exhaustive, and the need for better connections with other sciences such as biology, cognitive science and the social sciences.

The paper discusses only one of the different threads in the elaboration of a theoretical basis for futures studies, namely the components closer to science.

A proper theory for futures studies will contribute to making them more robust and efficient.

The general framework presented by the paper extends well beyond the somewhat restricted field of futures studies and includes social and psychological sciences, together with biology.

The purpose of this paper is to make a critical analysis of the views put forward by Claudio Gnoli (2018) in this paper concerning philosophical problems in library and information science (LIS).

The paper presents the basic ideas in Gnoli (2018) and discusses the set of basic assumptions, concepts and conclusions put forward.

It is argued that the idea of the theory of levels is basically sound, but we do not need to consider the material world, the mental world (minds) and the world of mentefacts as three different worlds. They represent different levels with different kinds of emergent properties in the world. Further, although the concepts of artifacts and mentefacts are useful, there are other terms within LIS, such as document, work and object that have been influential and should be discussed in this context. It is also argued that subjective vs objective knowledge is often confused with private vs public knowledge, which is problematic. Finally, it is claimed that the cognitive view and the “sociological view” are not about two different levels of reality but are competing views about the same reality.

The paper clarifies some aspects of the analytical framework of domain analysis and adds to the developments of the philosophical dimensions of information within LIS.

The different senses of the term information in physical, biological and social interpretations, and the possibility of connections between them, are addressed. Special attention is paid to Hofkirchner's Unified Theory of Information (UTI), proposing an integrated view in which the notion of information gets additional properties as one moves from the physical to the biological and the social realms. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

UTI is compared to other views of information, especially to two theories complementing several ideas of it: the theory of the hypertextual documental universe (“docuverse”) and the theory of integrative levels of reality. Two alternative applications of the complex of these three theories are discussed: a pragmatical, hermeneutic one, and a more ambitious realist, ontological one. The latter can be extended until considering information (“bit”) together with matter-energy (“it”) as a fundamental element in the world. Problems and opportunities with each view are discussed.

It is found that the common ground for all three theories is an evolutionary approach, paying attention to the phylogenetic connections between the different meanings of information.

Other theories of information, like Leontiev's, are not discussed as not especially related to the focus of the approach.

The paper builds on previously unnoticed affinities between different families of information-related theories, showing how each of them can provide fruitful complements to the other ones in clarifying the nature of information.

NOT for a long time have books and libraries featured in the correspondence columns of The Times and other newspapers as regularly as they have in 1960. Earlier in the year Sir Alan Herbert's lending rights' scheme had a good run, and we have clearly not yet heard the last of it. Indeed, a Private Member's bill on the subject is to have its second reading in Parliament on December 9th. More recently, the Herbert proposals have had a by‐product in the shape of bound paperbacks, and a correspondence ensued which culminated in Sir Allen Lane's fifth‐of‐November firework banning hard‐covered Penguins for library use.

The paper aims to investigate what is the best ontological framework of anticipatory systems. Its aim is to argue the thesis that the ontology on which anticipatory systems are based should be a dynamic one: a kind of process ontology. It seeks to include a demonstration of the fruitfulness of such an ontological framework for the investigation of anticipatory systems.

The methodology of the paper is a process ontological one. The objectives are achieved by a comparative analysis of the static and dynamic approaches to the ontological framework.

A process ontological framework is a reliable basis for the substantiation of the thesis that there is no great gap between living and non‐living systems as far as anticipation is concerned.

An example is represented of an anticipatory non‐living system that is artificially created and is programmed as a self‐control system. In this respect the paper has some practical implications.

A new approach is suggested to the investigation of anticipatory systems. It could be of interest not only for philosophers, but also for scientists who work on ontology as technology.

The purpose of this paper is the study of the causal relationship. The concept called “naive” causality can be stated more generally as the belief (or knowledge) that results follow actions, and that these results are not random, but are consistently linked with causes. The authors have thus formed a very general and precarious concept of causality, but one that appropriately reflects the meaning of causality at the level of common sense.

Mathematical and logical development of the causality in complex systems.

There are three aspects of rationality that give the human mind a unique vision of reality: quantification: reduction of phenomena to quantitative terms; cause and effect: causal relationship, which allows predicting; and the necessary and valid use of (deterministic) mechanical models. This work is dedicated to the second aspect, that of causality, but at present leaves aside the discussion of possibility-necessity, proposing a modification to philosophical synthesis of causality specified by Bunge (1959), with contributions made by Patten et al. (1976) and LeShan and Margenau (1982).

Causality is an epistemological category, because it concerns the experience and knowledge of the human subject, without being necessarily a property of reality.

This paper aims to examine the challenges and opportunities faced by the contemporary marketer looking to the future of the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Based on a review of the literature, futures studies and concepts originating from expert opinion, this paper explores futures studies, multiculturalism and international vs local branding in the context of the UAE.

The main challenges of operating in this environment include the cultural diversity and sensitivity of its consumers and short‐termism. Firms most likely to succeed in such a market are those which choose to honour and celebrate differences, thus promoting a form of common, multicultural identity among residents. A consideration of futures scenarios is essential for successful marketers in such a different and new market.

The difficulties of marketing in such a diversified marketplace and service‐scape as the UAE should be addressed. A culture of patience, tolerance and empathy needs to be established. With such a range of highly non‐homogeneous consumers, commonalities need to be embraced through acknowledging and celebrating differences, and a culture of multicultural inclusion practised. By looking at what has happened in a very short space of time and extrapolating forwards, an impression of what is to come in the UAE, and to a certain extent other locations, is envisaged. The need for marketers to build strategic flexibility to adapt to changes in the social, political and cultural environment is highlighted.

It is intended that such collaborative efforts as those reported in the paper and the opinions generated therein will engender deeper understanding and progress for the future of the UAE and the region.

The paper presents a novel and progressive approach to marketing to multicultural populations, bearing in mind a range of possible futures.

The purpose of this paper is to develop an ontological foundation for future studies, based in part on integrating some prior albeit incomplete work in this area.

This manuscript is based on a literature review, as well as on conceptual and theoretical enhancements from this subject field.

As the future does not exist (it is always something yet to come), the ontological foundations for studying the future must be based on the current reality of the physical, biological and social-psychological worlds of experience and ideas. From this basis, 10 postulates are provided that are based on that current reality and are applied to studying the future. Thus, by characterizing the current reality and how it is understood by people, meaningful statements about the future are possible.

For each ontological postulate, one or more implications for the study of the future are provided as guidelines for practice.

This manuscript integrates and builds on prior offerings about ontological concerns into a comprehensive framework that legitimates and focuses the practices of studying the future.