Documentosophy as the philosophical conceptualization of document entity

IF 0.2 Q4 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Nauchnye i Tekhnicheskie Biblioteki-Scientific and Technical Libraries Pub Date : 2022-10-04 DOI:10.33186/1027-3689-2022-9-127-146
Y. Stolyarov
{"title":"Documentosophy as the philosophical conceptualization of document entity","authors":"Y. Stolyarov","doi":"10.33186/1027-3689-2022-9-127-146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"   The author continues to substantiate the goal set by Arkady Sokolov to conceptualize the document entity.   As the initial point, he took Sokolov’s definition of documentosophy as the segment of sociocultural space to build, transfer, preserve and user meaningful communication messages referred to as documents. Sokolov also refers to the sphere of sociocultural production where the documents emerge, circulate and are preserved, as the documentosphere. The author argues that the adequate definition of the document is possible in its dialectic object-subject perception according to the international definition: the document is an object or recorded information provided that in the given documentation process (rather than generally!) it can be considered (by a subject) as a discrete whole. This results in the need to specify restrictions and to formulate narrower definition of the document specifically for each individual documentation process. The fundamental provision of relativity, conformity and conventionality of the concept “document” is explained; the author criticizes the mediaology claiming to replace documentive concepts with medialogical structures. In fact, the subject of documentology coincides with that of mediaology. However, firstly, each science has its own term, and, secondly, these are just their approaches that differ, i. e. the ontological approach is applied in documentology, and the communicative one in mediaology. The mediaology has been diligently though unreasonably avoiding the concepts of “document” and “information”. Thirdly, as opposed to documentology, the mediaology has been still unable to propose any brand-new and valuable insight into the document phenomenon.","PeriodicalId":42851,"journal":{"name":"Nauchnye i Tekhnicheskie Biblioteki-Scientific and Technical Libraries","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nauchnye i Tekhnicheskie Biblioteki-Scientific and Technical Libraries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2022-9-127-146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

   The author continues to substantiate the goal set by Arkady Sokolov to conceptualize the document entity.   As the initial point, he took Sokolov’s definition of documentosophy as the segment of sociocultural space to build, transfer, preserve and user meaningful communication messages referred to as documents. Sokolov also refers to the sphere of sociocultural production where the documents emerge, circulate and are preserved, as the documentosphere. The author argues that the adequate definition of the document is possible in its dialectic object-subject perception according to the international definition: the document is an object or recorded information provided that in the given documentation process (rather than generally!) it can be considered (by a subject) as a discrete whole. This results in the need to specify restrictions and to formulate narrower definition of the document specifically for each individual documentation process. The fundamental provision of relativity, conformity and conventionality of the concept “document” is explained; the author criticizes the mediaology claiming to replace documentive concepts with medialogical structures. In fact, the subject of documentology coincides with that of mediaology. However, firstly, each science has its own term, and, secondly, these are just their approaches that differ, i. e. the ontological approach is applied in documentology, and the communicative one in mediaology. The mediaology has been diligently though unreasonably avoiding the concepts of “document” and “information”. Thirdly, as opposed to documentology, the mediaology has been still unable to propose any brand-new and valuable insight into the document phenomenon.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
文献哲学是文献实体的哲学概念化
作者继续证实了Arkady Sokolov所设定的将文件实体概念化的目标。他以索科洛夫对文献哲学的定义为出发点,将其作为社会文化空间的一段,用以构建、传递、保存和使用有意义的传播信息,即文献。索科洛夫还将文献产生、流通和保存的社会文化生产领域称为文献圈。作者认为,根据国际定义,在其辩证的主客体感知中,文件的适当定义是可能的:文件是一个物体或记录的信息,只要在给定的文件编制过程中(而不是一般地!)它可以被(由主体)视为一个离散的整体。这导致需要指定限制,并为每个单独的文档过程制定更窄的文档定义。阐释了“文件”概念的相对性、一致性和约定俗成性的基本规定;作者批判了以媒介结构取代文献概念的媒介学。事实上,文献学的主题与媒介学的主题是一致的。然而,首先,每门科学都有自己的术语,其次,这些只是它们不同的方法,即文献学使用本体论方法,而媒介学使用交际方法。媒体界一直在努力地、不合理地回避“文献”和“信息”的概念。第三,相对于文献学而言,媒介学仍然无法对文献现象提出任何全新的、有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
66.70%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Grouping and categorizing library services at the official websites of central libraries of RF constituent territories: The need for standardized diversification The review of scientific research conducted by libraries: What comes next? Verification of classification modernization solutions (the case study of Library Bibliographic Classification) The virtual reality technologies in the educational processes in Kemerovo State Institute of Culture Special components of society digital transformation to influence technological and behavioral models of modern libraries (Annual report at the Seventh World Professional Forum “SOCHI–2023”)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1