Vers léconomie 2.0 (ED ORGANISATION) (French Edition)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Vers léconomie 2.0 (ED ORGANISATION) (French Edition) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Vers léconomie 2.0 (ED ORGANISATION) (French Edition) book. Happy reading Vers léconomie 2.0 (ED ORGANISATION) (French Edition) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Vers léconomie 2.0 (ED ORGANISATION) (French Edition) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Vers léconomie 2.0 (ED ORGANISATION) (French Edition) Pocket Guide.

The specific way in which the object of a discipline is defined is itself a matter for debate. In the case of hard sciences, such as life sciences, astronomy, and physics, their object may be more or less clearly identified. If demography deals with variations in populations, it can be said to have a recognizable object, just as gastroenterology or astrophysics do at least for the novice. The object of sociology is already more difficult to circumscribe, it can be everywhere.

As for philosophy, its object is most in de finite. Resist, as much as possible, the idea that objects, problems and methods could be the properties of specific disciplines. Its identity relies more on a consensus within the community of scientists than on conceptual agreements, and depends above all on the state of the power relations therein.

On the theoretical level, the circle of knowledge: any judgment on the relevance or validity of an assertion relies itself on the implicit recognition of a certain paradigm, hence on another judgment that cannot be proved. Perret, , p. Having acknowledged that the field cannot be defined by the ontological question naturally leads to the second alternative according to which ICS can only be defined by its project, i. This viewpoint is linked to the constructivist epistemology which holds that scientific objects do not exist independently of a subject that is to say, the person beholding them.

  • Kann ich gleich zurückrufen?: Der alltägliche Wahnsinn einer berufstätigen Mutter (German Edition).
  • Echange de Connaissances & Formations | GSEF!
  • 2.1. L’évacuation des zones frontalières.

Constructivist epistemology is compatible with the systemic theory of communication considered by many communication scholars as the most adequate theoretical foundation for ICS Mucchielli, As to how this communicational look or approach might be deployed as a methodology, Mucchielli , p. Hence, the communicational approach introduces a circular causality whereby communication is seen to take place in a system where interactions are circular chain of retroactions , thus placing this conceptual approach also within the paradigm of complexity.

According to this viewpoint, it follows that it is the manner in which objects are regarded that guarantees the uniqueness of the ICS discipline, not the objects themselves in this case, information and communication , since these can be claimed to also be the objects of investigation of other disciplines. Both advocate nonlinear, holistic approaches to the study of information and communication phenomena that serve communities of practice and discourse rather than individuals. The theoretical debate naturally spills over to the methodological level.

What kinds of methods are acceptable for the discipline of ICS? Several papers published during the 16th Annual Congress of the French Society for Information and Communication Science held in concluded that the diversity of objects of study, of epistemological traditions, and of theoretical approaches to information and communication show that no one methodological approach or theory can account for all the research that falls under the scope of the discipline.

Indeed, to try to impose a single unified theory is not only illusive, it is considered a totalitarian maneuver Bouillon, Not unlike information science in the Anglophone world, research in ICS also seems condemned to borrowing models, theories, and methods from other sciences. This is evident when one analyzes the methodologies deployed in doctoral dissertations defended in the ICS discipline.

Tourism in a Globalized Society (Contains papers in English and French)

Those concerned with interpersonal communication are in close and often explicit contact with anthropology and social psychology whereas dissertations focused on discourse analysis and on institutions flirt with education, history or law. This situation is not unique to ICS nor to France. A similar observation was made by Marcia Bates , p.

For reasons that have already been argued, this field requires multiple methodological approaches to conduct its research. It is to be hoped that it is finally recognized that all of these methodological approaches can be powerful and useful—especially in information science.

Bénéficiez des nouvelles technologies mobiles dans la gestion de la scolarité et la communication.

Polity echoed the same sentiments as Jeanneret and Ollivier and argued that a field cannot be defined through lexical or ontological definitions but by its objectives, the problems it proposes to study, and the methods it employs to solve these problems. Fondin and Buckland , for instance, have observed that one cannot usefully employ this term without specifying which meaning of information one is referring to.

My Wishlist

In the same vein, Fondin wrote: […] every word is thought of in the context of a theory or in reference to a more or less explicit model. It [the word] thus acquires specific properties. Documentaliste, Sciences de l'information, vol. More fundamentally, Fondin , acknowledged, as some of his Anglophone colleagues had done previously Saracevic, , that information science is torn between two competing paradigms: 1 an objectivist paradigm, which he attributed to the Anglophone world as if this world were homogeneous in its analysis and viewpoints and 2 a subjectivist conception, which he attributed to the French viewpoint but which is not peculiar to it, as I will show.

In a later article published online, Fondin tried to distinguish the French conception of information science from what he perceived as the North American one as follows: Is information a real tangible object or a social object? Meaning, this coherent mental representation that every human being constructs or deduces from things observed in his environment, what he calls information if the meaning is shared: is it immanent intrinsic because laid out in the document by its author, or constructed because contextually built by the beholder, in this case the reader?

  • Boo Bunnys Christmas Adventure (Adventures of Boo Bunny Book 2).
  • The Therabs (Thirty-1 Book 4).
  • Operationsatlas für die orthopädisch-unfallchirurgische Weiterbildung (German Edition).
  • 4.7 Logiciels déposés à l’Agence pour la Protection des Programmes.
  • Publications in French Journals.
  • Ghost Fetishes: Story 10?

In the former case, and this is explicitly or implicitly the thesis defended by advocates of information processing, those situated in the North American vision of information science, information is a discrete element. For them, all operations of extraction of elements by locating linguistic or other forms in texts are possible. And given that they are working on the original document, the results of the processing are all the more faithful to the text and to its author.

Meanings are compulsorily linked to a context, that in which it is received. In this viewpoint, information—i.

However, I think that there ought to be limits to individual construction of meaning. Taken too far, it may lead to serious ethical, historical, and practical problems. For instance, how many different meanings can be construed from Hitler's Mein Kampf? Is it acceptable that an individual construction of meaning leads to asserting that this book is about tolerance when indeed the very opposite is the case? Recently, Furner reviewed different philosophical views on the aboutness of documents. He identified at one end of the pole the idealist view, which holds that there is no way in which the aboutness i.

This binary polarization of conceptions of information and information science is found in the texts of many French ICS scholars. Obviously, for them, only the social conception of information is acceptable. Saracevic noted that this historic opposition dates back to the origin of the discipline and is attributed to two historic figures: Jesse Shera and Gerard Salton. They seem aware of the fact that information science cannot ignore technology altogether, nor can it fail to concern itself with the design of information systems as a means to ensure better access to information.

Bates , p. For ICS scholars, the act of communication is intentional—that is to say, triggered by humans for a given goal. Seeking to further distinguish the French conception of information science from the Anglophone one, he writes: No North American scholar can imagine having anything in common with communication scholars [in France].

The only enormous problem is that some forty years after its birth, information science is still chasing after its recognition. Indeed, how can one envisage a study of information that excludes the phenomena of communication that accompany it? How can one study the content of a message without considering those that create it, those that transform it and those that use it?

These activities, because they are highly complex ones with high stakes, are communication activities. Hence, in this light, information science cannot not belong to Information and Communication Sciences. Later, Buckland defended the viewpoint that information in itself is not important and that what is more important is its relation to knowledge and to communication. Another advocate of the social dimension of information, Saracevic proposed a definition of information science in which he emphasized the relation between information and knowledge and on the social function of information science in mediating between people and information resources.

As one can see, these viewpoints are remarkably close to those of French ICS in their conception of how the field should be defined—namely, by its projects and approaches rather than by the objects of investigation. It would appear that these texts are not widely known in the French ICS community and that language is indeed a barrier.

If this is the case, then we have a serious communication problem no pun intended.

  1. Die eroberung des mondes (German Edition)?
  2. OECD iLibrary | Home.
  3. The Biomedical Quality Auditor Handbook, Second Edition.
  4. In reality, Fondin's criticism applies more to Shannon's linear theory of communication and to research carried out within the field of IR, which is mostly of computational inspiration, but not to library and information science as it is developed in Anglophone countries, 24 It should be noted that while IR is historically considered a subpart of the Anglophone information science, this is not the case in France, where IR research is carried out mainly by computer science scholars.

    Although a handful of information science professors in France had worked on automatic indexing using NLP in early s and s, this line of research has since been abandoned to computer science. There are at least three French professors who have defended Shannon's contribution to the development of ICS in France.

    Europe : Actualité politique et économique - Le nouveau Geab est disponible

    He is considered the best French specialist of Shannon's work. He personally met Shannon and Norbert Wiener.

    French to English - Free translation practice 22nd July part 1

    Claude Baltz a , b , another interpreter of Shannon's work, has deplored how badly his mathematical theory of information has been misunderstood by communication scholars. In terms of research orientations, there also seems to be a remarkable convergence between some North American and French scholars. The three research questions outlined by Bates , p. The recurrent debate in France about where the boundaries of information science and ICS lie strongly echoes similar debates in the Anglophone world. With their usual pragmatism, our Anglophone colleagues have decided that not only can we not provide a sound scientific argument in support of any boundary but that this debate is a waste of time: It seems a remarkable waste of time and effort to worry about setting up disciplinary boundaries, and debating who is in and who is out.

    Bawden, Behind this deceptively simple question lies a series of epistemological questions about the very object of information science. The exact name of this branch within the ICS discipline is a point that is rarely debated in the French academic community. Or is it a combination of both? In the absence of this clarification, the door was left open to all kinds of interpretations and manipulations.

    Information science scholars in France have not yet agreed on whether we have one information science or several information sciences.

    Assemblées générales

    If the plural form is retained, what bodies of work differentiate one information science from another? What are the underlying paradigms of each information science? Two hypotheses can be put forward: The plural form is used implicitly to convey the idea that information science is made up of several disciplines or specialties from which it is historically derived, such as documentation, library studies, and archival studies; therefore, it constitutes a branch of the humanities or of the social sciences. For epistemological reasons, given that information science is an interdiscipline irrigated by different epistemological approaches and paradigms, the plural form subconsciously reflects the idea that each epistemological tradition constitutes a type of information science.

    Francophone scholars who refer to the discipline in the plural rarely go into theoretical justifications for their choice of form. A notable exception is the article by Fondin , where he analyzed the implications of using the singular and the plural form. In his view, the use of the plural form to designate the discipline is explained by the fact that information science is torn between two opposing and irreconcilable conceptual approaches or paradigms, as we have already noted above.

    This is in agreement with our second hypothesis above. Fondin wondered what specificity there might be behind this vision. This enables computer scientists who deal mainly with data, journalists, and information producers i. In this context, every scholar can use elements borrowed from other sciences but reconstructed to suit their object project of study.

    This specific object of study is yet to be defined. Fondin, However, Fondin observed that despite this quest for autonomy, Anglophone scholars have often talked about the plurality of information science. That social purpose, of collecting, organizing, and disseminating information shapes all the activities of the information disciplines. What drives information science is societal need Bates, ; Buckland, Be in this practice with the team before the event and you will be practicing well at the event.

    The practice contributes to the container. If we want the event participants to experience deep learning, then the team should share their learning edges with each other. If the team is trusting and trying something new during the convening, beyond our fears, with the support of each other, then we are modelling that for the whole event. There is life in the trembling and this is being in a community of practice.