Data and information
Any search for definitions in scientific literature never fails to puzzle me. In this case, I was looking for definitions of information. What I found was often relative to other terms like data, knowledge and intelligence. Interestingly, rather trying to elucidate the relations between terms, most definitions sought to make sharp distinctions, as well as to downplay one term and elevate another. In particular, data were often presented as raw, unorganized facts, permanent object properties, with little if any meaning - base stuff. Information, on the other hand, was elevated and refined: data processed and organized so as to be meaningful and useful. Frequent examples of information referred to statistical techniques, which clearly could purify data to the extreme.
Such definition reek of biases, e.g. that data are dumb or that knowledge is the proper accumulation of information. As a result, they fail to account for things we know about the world and our cognition, from the way information is communication between physical entities, such as a flower sending information to a bee's eyes, to how human creativity affects information. Coming against such definitions leaves me with more questions than answers. Should I therefore just trust the authority of the authors and impose their definitions on my perception of the world?
The answer can be found in rhetoric and its modes: pathos, ethos and logos. Pathos appeals to our emotions: let's save the environment, for example. Even with limited further explanation, it seems a good idea. In practice, however, it can lead to disasters, like saving one species from extinction and, by doing so, disturbing ecological balance to the detriment of more species. So, pathos needs to be accompanied by logos: good argumentation that helps us understand. Ethos relates to authority, such as an eminent professor telling stuff in a lecture. We tend to believe such authorities. It is important, however, that they also employ logos to convince us by explaining and illustrating their statements.
From the perspective of rhetoric, therefore, we have little to gain from definitions merely based on ethos or pathos. We also need to apply logos, both as developers and as receivers of definitions. Beware of definitions given in a couple of sentences, without further analysis and explanation.
No comments:
Post a Comment