Comments on: social epistemology in LIS http://laurenpressley.com/library/2007/01/social-epistemology-in-lis/ reading, thinking, and experimenting with the future of libraries, education, and information Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:40:59 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Md. Roknuzzaman http://laurenpressley.com/library/2007/01/social-epistemology-in-lis/comment-page-1/#comment-15575 Md. Roknuzzaman Wed, 28 May 2008 04:06:12 +0000 http://laurenpressley.com/library/?p=196#comment-15575 Okay, Lauren. I appreciate your sharp response! Thanking you. Okay, Lauren.

I appreciate your sharp response!

Thanking you.

]]> By: lauren pressley http://laurenpressley.com/library/2007/01/social-epistemology-in-lis/comment-page-1/#comment-15555 lauren pressley Tue, 27 May 2008 20:45:41 +0000 http://laurenpressley.com/library/?p=196#comment-15555 Thanks Md.Roknuzzaman! Sure, you can use it as a reference. What bibliographical details are you looking for? I submitted it as part of a graduate program, so I suspect you could treat it as a white paper... Thanks Md.Roknuzzaman! Sure, you can use it as a reference. What bibliographical details are you looking for? I submitted it as part of a graduate program, so I suspect you could treat it as a white paper…

]]> By: Md. Roknuzzaman http://laurenpressley.com/library/2007/01/social-epistemology-in-lis/comment-page-1/#comment-15538 Md. Roknuzzaman Tue, 27 May 2008 05:34:01 +0000 http://laurenpressley.com/library/?p=196#comment-15538 I'm reading your paper entitled "Social Epistemology in LIS". It is an interesting and useful paper for the readers of both disciplines. For my research purpose, I would like to use your paper as a reference. Would you please provide me the bibliographical details of your paper? I would highly appreciate your cooperation. I’m reading your paper entitled “Social Epistemology in LIS”. It is an interesting and useful paper for the readers of both disciplines. For my research purpose, I would like to use your paper as a reference. Would you please provide me the bibliographical details of your paper? I would highly appreciate your cooperation.

]]> By: lauren pressley http://laurenpressley.com/library/2007/01/social-epistemology-in-lis/comment-page-1/#comment-9752 lauren pressley Sun, 15 Apr 2007 18:34:45 +0000 http://laurenpressley.com/library/?p=196#comment-9752 Thank you for your comment, of course it is not too long. I really appreciate your input! This paper was done as an independent study, with minimal guidance, and I was doing it mostly as an exploration so that I could have a basic understanding of these ideas. Your points are well taken, and I appreciate the insights you suggest. Thank you for your comment, of course it is not too long. I really appreciate your input! This paper was done as an independent study, with minimal guidance, and I was doing it mostly as an exploration so that I could have a basic understanding of these ideas. Your points are well taken, and I appreciate the insights you suggest.

]]> By: Pilar M. Moreno http://laurenpressley.com/library/2007/01/social-epistemology-in-lis/comment-page-1/#comment-9243 Pilar M. Moreno Wed, 04 Apr 2007 18:21:33 +0000 http://laurenpressley.com/library/?p=196#comment-9243 Lauren, I have just read your paper about "Social Epistemology in Library and Information Science". Of course, I have comments on it. I find it very interesting mostly from the point of view of the context and actual applications of social epistemology in library practice. I don`t agree, however, on the relationships you established between sociology and social epistemology. Shera explained the difference between those fields of inquiry in "Sociological Foundations of Librarianship" (1970, New York: Asia Publishing House). Usually, philosophy is considered -methodologically speaking- conceptual and normative; and sociology, empirical and descriptive (I think the best explanation of that idea is in: Resnik, D. 1996. Social epistemology and the ethics of research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 27(4), 565-586). Fuller is a sociologist of science who claims that social epistemology must be normative. So, I think the most sociological approach to social epistemology is that of the construtivist views. Normative research seek to evaluate practices (Goldman) or organizations (Fuller) for recommending the best ways to acquire knowledge. Descriptive ones, in turn, analize and explain the ways knowledge is socially constructed (see for example Tuominen & Savolainen). I think we as librarians could follow any of these three options, as Fallis (following mostly Goldman), Zandonade (in agreement with Fuller) and Van House (agreeing mostly with constructivist theories) have done. I hope it can be useful to you. Sorry if it is a too long comment. Lauren,

I have just read your paper about “Social Epistemology in Library and Information Science”.
Of course, I have comments on it.
I find it very interesting mostly from the point of view of the context and actual applications of social epistemology in library practice.
I don`t agree, however, on the relationships you established between sociology and social epistemology. Shera explained the difference between those fields of inquiry in “Sociological Foundations of Librarianship” (1970, New York: Asia Publishing House).
Usually, philosophy is considered -methodologically speaking- conceptual and normative; and sociology, empirical and descriptive (I think the best explanation of that idea is in: Resnik, D. 1996. Social epistemology and the ethics of research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 27(4), 565-586). Fuller is a sociologist of science who claims that social epistemology must be normative. So, I think the most sociological approach to social epistemology is that of the construtivist views. Normative research seek to evaluate practices (Goldman) or organizations (Fuller) for recommending the best ways to acquire knowledge. Descriptive ones, in turn, analize and explain the ways knowledge is socially constructed (see for example Tuominen & Savolainen).
I think we as librarians could follow any of these three options, as Fallis (following mostly Goldman), Zandonade (in agreement with Fuller) and Van House (agreeing mostly with constructivist theories) have done.

I hope it can be useful to you. Sorry if it is a too long comment.

]]>