The Materiality of Knowledge Organization: Epistemology, Metaphors and Society

384 Knowl. Org. 40(2013)No.6 J. Hansson. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization

Joacim Hansson

Linnaeus University, Department of Library and Information Science, School of Cultural Sciences, 351 95 Växjö (Sweden),

Joacim Hansson is professor of library and information science at Linnaeus University, Växjö Sweden. He has published six books and numerous articles on librarianship and knowledge organization, both in Sweden and internationally.

Hansson, Joacim. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization: Epistemology, Metaphors and Society. Knowledge Organization. 40(6), 384-391. 29 references.

ABSTRACT: This article discusses the relation between epistemology, social organization and knowledge organization. Three examples are used to show how this relation has proven to be historically stable: 1) the organization of knowledge in 18th century encyclopedias; 2) the problem of bias in the international introduction of DDC in early 20th century libraries in Scandinavia; and 3) the practice of social tagging and folksonomies in contemporary late capitalist society. By using the concept of ‘materiality’ and the theoretical contribution on the documentality of social objects by Maurizio Ferraris, an understanding of the character of the connection between epistemology and social order in knowledge organization systems is achieved.

Received and accepted 1 September 2013

1.0 Introduction sumptions in library and information science literature, as found in, for instance, ‘classic’ knowledge organization In his important but largely overlooked essay Information theory (Svenonius 2001; 2004) and domain theory (Hjör- Criticism: Where Is It? Jack Andersen makes a simple, but land 2008). It emphasises the relation between knowledge, epistemologically important, proposition: “Society is the power, and division of labor as the foundation of knowl- basic unit of knowledge organization” (Andersen 2008, edge organization. In its directness, Andersen’s statement 102). Anderson (102-103) goes on to demonstrate how might feel like a truism, but dismissing it as such may be a this works: mistake, not least looking at today’s pervasive information flows and digital document environments. Instead it pre- Social organization GENERATES religion, law, poli- sents us with interesting challenges for knowledge organi- tics, science, economics, education, art, commerce, zation. The reason for this is simply that knowledge can industry, and administration, which GENERATE take many forms. documents and information affiliated with institu- In his deeply influential study Knowledge: Its Creation, Dis- tions that support and maintain social structures, tribution and Economic Significance (1982), Fritz Machlup ac- power & influence, which GENERATES produces counts for five general types that can be considered legiti- and distributes, through a variety of genres: books, mate as the basis of classificatory structures: (1) practical articles, journals, laws, reports, memorandums, ad- knowledge; (2) intellectual knowledge; (3) small-talk and vertisements, newspapers, pamphlets, and different pastime knowledge; (4) spiritual knowledge; (5) unwanted communicative situations, which GENERATE knowledge. When we consider the history of knowledge knowledge organization systems. organization systems, we find an almost exclusive limita- tion to the first two categories; practical knowledge and in- This perspective on the division of knowledge goes far tellectual knowledge. People in general, however, build beyond the traditionally formulated epistemological as- their lives on various combinations of all five categories of Knowl. Org. 40(2013)No.6 385 J. Hansson. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization knowledge, as noted through Machlup’s sociological per- non and Whitford 1994; Trosow 2001), then it is simply a spective. While confining analytic structures in knowledge general turn of belief, which proposes that reality only ex- organization systems to such limitations, we live in a soci- ists in relation to our ability to express it. Such propositions ety (at least in the so called ‘developed’ countries) where may take form as language games, as in Ludwig Wittgen- the current form of capitalism has gone so far that it stein’s Philosophical Investigations (2009a), where the signifi- forces us to rethink much of what we have learned being cance of a terminology is dependent on the context and ‘true’ legitimate knowledge. Furthermore, ‘truth’ is today language use at hand. connected to ‘information,’ which, in turn, is increasingly What Wittgenstein did was to emphasize that the mean- defined by economic value. This development has been— ing of language (thus knowledge) is directly related to its and is—rapid. It triggers a need to question and discuss the potential use. He formulated this idea as an alternative to value of knowledge organization and its underlying epis- his own ‘picture theory’ described in Tractatus Logico- temological assumptions. This article is thought to be a Philosophicus (2009b). The picture theory was based on the part of such a discussion. The main part consists of a dis- Aristotelian notion that knowledge categories are objective cussion around three examples, where social change and and that language mirrors knowledge mimetically by refer- ideological preferences have played a significant role in the ence. The alternative epistemology of Philosophical Investiga- promotion of new forms of knowledge organization sys- tions provided traditional knowledge organization with a tems. The perspective of the analysis is basically materialis- whole new set of problems. Elaine Svenonius refers to it as tic, in a broad, neo-Marxist sense; relations between social a shift from ‘paradigmatic’ to ‘syntagmatic’ relations in the structure, economic power and division of labor govern term structures of classification systems and thesauri: the way in which claims of epistemological legitimacy for “paradigmatic relationships are those that are context-free, knowledge organization systems are made. Furthermore, definitional, and true in all possible worlds. Syntagmatic re- such factors ultimately determine which claims actually lationships are space-time dependent, aposteriori, empiri- gain legitimacy (Hansson 2006). For such a perspective, the cal, synthetic, and often transient” (Svenonius 2004, 583). quote from Andersen is a good start. Before we arrive at Thus, syntagmatic relationships emerge as they are formu- the examples, though, we need to initiate a brief discussion lated and their significance is socially, ideologically, and on the problem of finding an adequate epistemological po- pragmatically constructed. sition in relation to the organization of knowledge. Today, the value of social constructivism and postmodern views on science are scrutinized and questioned 2.0 Ontology lost? too. Critique comes from various places, but is most prevalent within philosophy itself. But, as contemporary Knowledge organization systems normally presupposes society tends to move away from a moral and epistemo- some kind of ontology, that there is something ‘out there,’ logical common ground, thus allowing several forms of independent of individual conscience and experience, that knowledge to prevail side by side, is it really reasonable to it is possible to know something about and thus to organ- dismiss constructivism and postmodern relativism? The ize. In that sense, most systems are thought to be repro- multitude of legitimate knowledge forms seen today is ducing some sort of structure, which refers to an equiva- more or less randomly connected to different document lent in the world as such. This presupposes a very funda- types in digital environments. Is not postmodern mental assumption; that epistemology is a sort of ‘key’ (post)epistemology and practice the very essence of late with which it is possible to unlock the ontological level of capitalist society? Well, it seems to depend on what we are reality, whether natural, social, or spiritual. The fact is that, talking about—it may be so on a day-to-day sociopolitical turning back to Machlup, only two categories of knowl- level, but not necessarily so when it comes to epistemol- edge make ontological claims: intellectual and spiritual. It is ogy and its consequences for knowledge organization. As also within these that we find struggles of epistemology. postmodernism denounces ontology as such, and in most As bibliographical classification systems in most cases refer cases epistemology too, we face a problem. We need to be to intellectual knowledge, often in the form of disciplinary able to formulate an ontological level independent of rela- divisions in academia (also when it comes to spiritual tivistic approach. Such ontology must encapsulate mate- knowledge; ‘religion’), claims and metaphors of scientific rial, social, and ideal objects. One attempt of promoting knowledge is of interest to discuss. One of the most tradi- such an ontology, especially in relation to social objects is tional claims of scientific knowledge is that of ‘objectivity,’ presented by the Italian philosopher Maurizio Ferraris in The notion of objectivity has, however, been heavily chal- his book Documentality: Why It Is Necessary To Leave Traces lenged now for several decades. If it is not social construc- (2013). Taking the material document as a point of depar- tivism (Berger and Luckmann 1966), neo-pragmatism ture, he creates an ontological statement that seemingly (Rorty 1982), or various standpoint epistemologies (Len- bridges the gap between relativism and epistemological 386 Knowl. Org. 40(2013)No.6 J. Hansson. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization stability, as needed in systems for knowledge organization. social production of documents. This production is also What he proposes is that social acts and objects may well the foundation of epistemology, discernible only through have an ontological basis—through the documents that the production and dissemination of material documents. present these acts and objects. He formulates this relation I might have followed Ferraris more closely and talked as: social object = inscribed act. Social objects are onto- about a ‘documentality’ of knowledge organization, but I logically ‘fixed’ by documents, and by organizing these find that a wider notion is more interesting to consider, documents, organization of legitimate knowledge be- thus the concept of materiality. It is now time to present comes possible. In commenting on postmodernism, Fer- three different examples of situations where this is shown; raris (2013, 80-81) draws up an elementary distinction, the first highlights the structures of 18th century French ending in a simple enough proposition: and English encyclopedias; the second shows Dewey Deci- mal Classification (DDC) in relation to the Swedish library The dissolutions of facts into interpretations and of sector; the third puts focus on the development of folk- the world into texts has not led to the emancipation sonomies and social tagging in today’s digital document that Nietzsche and the postmodernists talked about, environments. The aim of these examples is to shed a but rather to populism and authoritarianism. That is light on our present day situation where material, social, the bad news. The good news, however, is that none and economic conditions trigger change in new ways, of it is true. Reality stays where it is and where it has which in turn determine how we think of socially legiti- always been, perfectly indifferent to our theoretical mate organization of documented knowledge. wranglings .... What I would like to contrast with dispiriting results is that we have been making much 3.1 Trees and circles—modern structures of knowledge ado about nothing, because reality has not disap- peared, being has never been superseded by knowl- With the division of knowledge in The Advancement of edge and knowledge has never been overcome by Learning (1953) through to his Novum Organum (1953), will. What I propose therefore is a passage from Francis Bacon created a fundamental structure that would hermeneutic relativism to realist objectivism. provide a template for numerous divisions of knowledge in various practical and ideological contexts. As a philoso- He does this by ascribing documents a significant position pher, his aim was not to create a pragmatic division of in formulating a realist/materialist position. Documents knowledge, but instead to make a representation which constitute the very basis of social objects, which are there could integrate a traditional theocentric worldview with for us to analyse and understand. This basically brings us one of empirical science. In its structure, hierarchical and back to the introductory proposition by Andersen, that treelike, we see the very bridge between the ‘modern’ ‘society’ is the only true basis for knowledge organization. world and that which was before. Indeed, in many ways It is an equally document-based formulation of society Bacon himself personalized this bridge through his work. and social objects. However, what Andersen does that Although the basic tree-structure of Bacon’s division of Ferraris does not, is to place the construction of knowl- knowledge has remained, his system has been manipu- edge organization systems as immediate generators of lated, distorted, and used in manifestations of epistemo- document based social objects. There is room for inter- logical differences. pretation, but this room is not unlimited. Reality/society One of the most well known examples of rewriting (division of labour, structures of institutions, economic Bacon is the Système Figuré des Connaissances Humaine by power) is a corrective force, and it is possible for us to at- Diderot and D’Alembert from 1751, used as the structur- tain knowledge of it. Having arrived at this point, we may ing fundament of their Encyclopédie. This is said to be the discuss knowledge organization systems and the kind of very definition of the spirit of the Enlightenment. The social and epistemological relations they present—or are correspondence between the main categories of knowl- the results of—as inscribed acts. This presupposes that edge and the faculties of the human mind—history/ knowledge may be seen as a social object and bringing to- memory; philosophy/reason; poetry/imagination—which gether Andersen and Ferraris, this seems quite plausible. was one of the major novelties of Bacon, is here used in a Having taken this position, it is possible to talk about the highly original manner. 18th century encyclopedias were ‘materiality’ of knowledge organization. part of a large epistemological redirection. They at- tempted to fulfill the dream of a comprehensible structure 3.0 The materiality of knowledge organization for all human knowledge in forms that would be considered practical for their time. Not only were the categories The concept of materiality in regard to knowledge organi- of knowledge systematized, they were also filled with con- zation refers to a determined way of influence seen in the tent (entries), providing an overview not only of the struc- Knowl. Org. 40(2013)No.6 387 J. Hansson. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization ture itself, but even more importantly, of what was actu- est—and certainly the most influential—there was in Eng- ally known. It is when this component, the actually land a hoard of encyclopedic projects, commencing with known, is added that the structure of knowledge become Ephraim Chambers’ Cyclopedia in 1728. The metaphor un- epistemologically relevant. derlying the structure in these questioned the tree meta- Bacon had difficulties fitting the parallel worldviews of phor, instead giving precedence to the ‘circle of knowl- his time into one system, leading him to actually construct edge’ or ‘circle of learning.’ Whereas the tree of knowl- ‘two’ trees of knowledge; one structuring ‘human learning,’ edge formulated a structure of mutually exclusive catego- based on the memory/reason/imagination order of cate- ries, clearly distinguishing for example art from science gories mentioned above, and one ordering ‘divine learning,’ and individuals from society, the circle metaphor tended split into “the nature of revelation” and “the matter re- to be more inclusive and holistic, referring to the very vealed” (Darnton 1984, 212). The former of the divine etymology of the term ‘encyclopedia’ as a guide to the cir- learning categories contained for example church and doc- cle of knowledge. Julie Hawley (2006, 219) emphasizes trinal history, whilst the latter structured moral, positive this turning back to the original meaning in her analysis of law, and liturgy, i.e., the practical aspects and consequences the ideology behind English encylopedias: of Christian life. To include theology as a subject among others was still a step too bold. Interestingly enough, that The term encyclopedia connects the alphabetically step was taken already in 1627 by Gabriel Naudé in his ordered folios with a richer sense of the circle of practical Advis Pour Dresser une Bibliothèque, where ‘religion’ learning as something that not only brought to- was an integral part of the recommended classification for gether the arts and the sciences, but also united the libraries in Paris at that time (Naudé 1963). The inclusion macro- and microcosmos in a harmonious sphere of theology as a part of the tree of knowledge posed no of divine plentitude. problem for Diderot in the Encyclopédie. Instead it is seen as one of the most overt epistemological markers in the sys- Interestingly enough, the original and inclusive view on tem. David Adams (2006) points at the ideological use of the epistemological character of the knowledge structures the tree metaphor in the Encyclopédie and to the subversive in encyclopedias was largely ignored in the succeeding de- nature of both the structure itself and the use of cross- velopment of practical, bibliographical classification sys- references between entries. Religion is included in the tems emerging in the 19th century. Instead the original structure under the main category of ‘Reason’ as ‘Knowl- Baconian structure prevailed through further manipula- edge of God,’ subdivided as follows: tion. Machlup acknowledges this as a critical problem, for which one cannot blame Bacon himself: “If anyone is to Knowledge of God be reproached, it should be those who have adhered too Natural theology closely to Bacon’s model and have allowed it to endure Revealed theology and dominate the classification systems of higher learning Knowledge of good and evil spirits in subsequent centuries” (Machlup 1982, 42). These sys- Divination tems of higher learning have guided the construction of Black Magic bibliographical classification as well, first and foremost through the use of disciplinary division. Today, the holistic The denouncement of the authority of the church in the ideal of the circle of knowledge has returned in much prerevolutionary France is here clearly seen, primarily in knowledge related practice, not least in digital document the position of categories such as ‘Black magic’ and spiri- environments, formal (and informal) learning contexts, tuality close to more doctrinal theology. Adams (2006, and such postmodern knowledge structures as folksono- 200) concludes: “The way in which religion is handled in mies and other popular indexing practices. We shall return the table shows that the divisions of knowledge set out in to these in just a little while. Before that, however, we will the Système are not based on any demonstrably cogent or turn to our second example, where one specific Baconian logical principles.” The position in the system makes ra- adaptation was met with skepticism, although on a less tional empiricism precide also over the metaphysical, theo- grand scale than in the case of encyclopedias. logical, and magical. Therefore, as such, the positions are more political than logical. 3.2 The order of culture: DDC and Sweden The fact that most of the epistemological inspiration for the Encyclopédie came from across the English canal— In 1921, Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) was already a Bacon, Newton, Locke—is interesting in that the English full-fledged international system. Its bias however was ex- support for the ideas of D’Alembert and Diderot was plicitly Anglo-Saxon. The structure, mentioned by Dewey weak. Although Diderot’s project was perhaps the larg- as an “inverted Baconian arrangement” (Wiegand 1996, 388 Knowl. Org. 40(2013)No.6 J. Hansson. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization

23), replicated in a rather straight manner the scientific, 3.3 Dissolving (the old) prescriptives: rhizomes economic, educational, and industrial ideals of late 19th and a new kind of ontology century USA. Due to this, flaws and inconveniences became apparent as the system was gradually introduced in As information technology has developed during the last other countries. In Scandinavian countries, the introduc- few decades, the epistemological relevance of structured tion of DDC took place during the first two decades of hierarchical knowledge organization system has been chal- the 20th century. Strategies varied significantly. In Norway, lenged, both on a practical and epistemological level (Hjør- the system was applied without any major alterations. In land 2011). Facet classification did not really change any- Denmark, drastic changes in the hierarchies were under- thing; it simply made existing enumerative systems more taken to fit the requirements of the mostly small Danish flexible. For example, the introduction of faceted elements libraries. In Sweden, the decision was taken in 1921 not to in DDC increased its capacity to deal with complex sub- introduce DDC at all. Instead, a national classification sys- jects, but it did not alter the biased view of society that it tem, the SAB-system, was constructed, exclusively to fit presented, nor did it change the emphasis on traditional the practical and ideological needs of Swedish libraries. classification theory, ultimately based on Baconian empiri- The main reason was, however, ultimately epistemological cism and the authority of rational, scientific knowledge. (Hansson 1997 and 1999). The Swedish library sector— A major change, both technological and discursive, oc- especially academic libraries—was at that time heavily in- curred during and after World War II. As ‘information’ fluenced by Prussian academic culture, thus serving a very gradually started to compete with ‘knowledge’ as the different view on knowledge than that which provided the founding concept of knowledge organization and dis- foundation for DDC. This was seen, for instance, in that semination, a point was reached where the two were the SAB-system gave more prominence in its tables to treated almost synonymously. As information gained fur- what we today speak of as the ‘humanities’ than did DDC. ther prominence in society as a whole, quantification and Further, it can be said to have followed the holistic ideals economic value attribution to knowledge and documenta- of the British encyclopedias, although no reference was tion started to determine also qualitative aspects of vari- ever made to them—several categories allowed for both ous systems. Effectiveness in information retrieval sys- scientific, popular, and fictional literature on specific top- tems increased with every new update, and hierarchical ics, for example in the category of ‘hunting and fishing’ classification systems were suddenly no longer considered (Hansson 1999, 181). The reason is partly found in the the most adequate way of organizing information. New connection to the Prussian intellectual sphere, but also in computerized information systems were based (in a broad the relation between public libraries of Sweden and large sense) on indexing, and as indexing services improved ac- popular educational movements, such as the International cess to scientific knowledge, it was subjected to critique Organization of Good Templars (IOGT), engaging a for creating indexing inconsistencies, such as cognitively huge part of the Swedish population in its work for sobri- biased individual indexers (Frohmann 1992). ety and adult education. Movements like IOGT applied a This problem was due not only to the individualization holistic, pragmatic view on knowledge, both in theory and of information processes, which is the focus of Froh- practice. Symptomatically, as the social democratic welfare mann, but also of the development of scientific disci- state has been systematically deconstructed during the last plines, tending towards multi- and cross-disciplinary con- two decades, epistemological, technological, and practical structs which were difficult for traditional classification grounds were laid also for the introduction DDC. Society systems to grasp. With the advent of the Internet in the as the ‘basic unit of knowledge organization’ has now mid-1990s, the idea of indexer subjectivity instead became changed. As the market economy model of the USA now a stepping-stone of a whole new way of looking at is being fully implemented in Sweden as well, the episte- knowledge retrieval and dissemination. Professional and mological assumptions of DDC fit in well. Swedish librar- prescriptive indexing practices were seriously challenged ies started, on the initiative from the National Library of even by the very prospects of the Internet. Within the Sweden, to implement DDC in 2008. In the final report knowledge organization community, discussions emerged of the Swedish Dewey Project from 2013, it is stated that al- on how to meet this development. There was a wish to most all academic libraries have applied DDC, but only organize the Internet through further development of ex- two public libraries have done so. The reason for this is isting bibliographical classification systems (Mustafa El the ability of the SAB-system to provide a more prag- Hadi et al. 1998). As it turned out, no one actually asked matic classification which fits public libraries, while DDC for that. Instead new forms of knowledge organization provides the academic libraries with the accurate tools for practices emerged. Eventually, the practice of social tag- working in the international environment of contempo- ging and the construction of folksonomies would prove rary science communication (Svanberg 2013). to have major epistemological implications. Knowl. Org. 40(2013)No.6 389 J. Hansson. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization

The new element was found outside of the traditional, One such method is seen in the FolksOntology strategy by controlled bibliographic systems. Development of com- Van Damme et al. (2007), using web-based social communities mercial information systems and finally the (real or not) to enhance and aggregate tagging practices, thus providing threat to the academic publication industry, Open Access a user-generated form of ‘ontology’ summarizing the col- initiatives, proved that control over information and lected understanding of term construction of a certain knowledge held an economic value that finally set phi- community—be it of a profession (e.g., medicine, psy- losophical considerations aside. By doing so, the loss of chology, law, librarianship) or a social media community epistemology in the construction of knowledge and in- targeting everyday practices and interests (e.g., progrock, formation systems became apparent. Also, the very con- home schooling, Gnosticism, long distance running, vege- cept ‘ontology’ changed to the meaning we ascribe it to- tarianism)—bringing together people of different cultural day; simply that which is being structured or indexed. De- and sociopolitical contexts. This is something quite differ- velopment of the semantic web, or web 2.0, during the ent from the ontology in any philosophical understanding last decade has brought tremendous strain on the very of the term, but it corresponds well to the pragmatics of idea of ontologically (or at least philosophically) founded postmodern thought. It seems to have no need of pre- knowledge organization systems. Pre-web indexing prac- scriptive classification. Instead abstract, emotional, and tices kept a significant element of term control and con- spiritual experiences can, in a way traditional classification trol of relational structures. Social tagging does not. It is schemes and indexing systems are unable to, be collected based on a bottom-up inductive structure, where web us- and given a new legitimacy. ers provide documents with tags (terms) that can be of a It is symptomatic of research on popular indexing prac- variety of epistemic characters and knowledge forms (sci- tices that the term ‘information’ sometimes equals ‘prod- entific, practical, emotional, religious, pastime). More than uct,’ as in Held et al. (2012). In their study on the relation anything, they reflect the everyday understanding of the between social tagging and individual knowledge creation web users’ experiences in searching and storing docu- through web navigating processes, they show how signifi- ments (textual, commercial, pictorial) for sharing or fur- cant the individual’s preconceived knowledge is. A person ther use. Robinson and Maguire (2010, 609) suggest that with incorrect prior knowledge (e.g., about a medical con- the “Aristotelian structure of information organisation has dition) clearly tends to follow navigation paths that con- dissolved, replaced by something more amorphous, if firm his or her incorrect knowledge. This is an example of more creative,” thus proposing a ‘rhizome’ metaphor to the ontological segmentation of digital document envi- replace the tree or circle as the best way to represent the ronments that we find on today’s social web environment. documentality and information structure on the web. One authority—epistemologically prescriptive classifica- Even if folksonomies today gain prominence, Dotsika tion—has been replaced by another—individualized (2009) identifies taxonomies and ontologies as alternatives knowledge claims. Affective reliance on personal experi- with a subsequently increasing controlled order of rela- ence and prejudice are given epistemological status in the tionships within a given vocabulary. This levelling of or- world of the individual. ganization of information (one hardly speaks of knowledge anymore) contributes to problems of integration 4.0 Conclusions that might have occurred earlier too, not least as principles of literary warrant were integrated into ontological claims It is important to remind us that sociopolitical power of knowledge organization systems. Dotsika (2009, 409) structures and class patterns still exist, and they influence summarizes the problem faced in the complex digital the chain of inference illustrated by Andersen in the intro- document environment of the web: duction of this article. The materiality of knowledge organization is intact—turning digital has not changed any- While the semantic web creators see the powers of thing in that respect. As classification upholds the tradi- web 2.0 sophisticated data interfaces, collaborative tional relation between an ontological level of being, epis- content generation, search and sharing, most web temological structures, and pragmatic adjustments of these 2.0 enthusiasts know that their collaboratively engi- for bibliographical purposes, the fundamental relation be- neered content fails a platform for automated tween scientific taxonomy and classification attributes the search, intelligent agents and inter-application inte- latter a sort of authority, which is both normative and pre- gration. As a result there is an increasing number of scriptive. Based on this authority libraries and document methods that aim to bring together the bottom-up collections have been organized in a way that has always approach of folksonomies with the traditional top- been reasonably logic and coherent. This has been possi- down design of ontologies. ble, as society has acknowledged this order as legitimate. In contemporary digital document environments the rhi- 390 Knowl. Org. 40(2013)No.6 J. Hansson. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization zome-like flexibility is made possible only in a society Berger, Peter L. and Luckmann, Thomas. 1966. The social where the whole is always and only the sum of its parts. construction of reality: a treatise on the sociology of knowledge. What people feel is true, or at least adequate, ‘is’ true and New York: Anchor Press. adequate. This brings a new role to ontology—all of Darnton, Robert. 1984. Philosophers trim the tree of Machlup’s five general types of knowledge are now treated knowledge: the epistemological strategy of the Ency- more or less equally on the World Wide Web. The shift clopédie. In The great cat massacre: and other episodes in from ‘knowledge’ to ‘information’ on the Internet has not French cultural history. New York: Basic Books, pp. 191- only changed the meaning of ‘ontology’; it has turned 213. knowledge into a product with defined economic value. In Dotsika, Fefie. 2009. Uniting formal and informal descrip- this new (dis)order lies a fundamental illusion of the non- tive power: reconciling ontologies with folksonomies. prescriptiveness of the semantic web. One might instead International journal of information management 29: 407-15. claim that one prescriptive authority has been replaced by Ferraris, Maurizio. 2013. Documentality: why it is necessary to another. We see it in various social relations, for example, leave traces. New York: Fordham University Press. in libraries (user influence on acquisitions), hospitals (pa- Frohmann, Bernd. 1992. The power of images: a dis- tient influence on medical decisions), and universities (stu- course analysis of the cognitive viewpoint. Journal of dent influence on curriculums). Traditional institutional au- documentation 48: 385-386. thority is challenged, much based on increased access to in- Hansson, Joacim. 1997. Why public libraries in Sweden formation. In the late capitalism we live in today, economic did not choose Dewey. Knowledge organization 24: 145-53. value of documents in a simple Google search govern the Hansson, Joacim. 1999. Klassifikation, bibliotek, samhälle: en pattern of retrieved documents. We see a new Matthew ef- kritisk hermeneutisk studie av ‘Klassifikationssystem för svens- fect—the documents most likely found in a specific search ka bibliotek’. Göteborg/Borås: Valfrid. pattern are the ones that give economic revenue, which in Hansson, Joacim. 2006. Knowledge organization from an turn make them the ones most likely to be retrieved. It is a institutional point of view: implications for theoretical new kind of epistemology; one that ascribes individual and practical development. Progressive librarian 27: 31-43. documents a status resembling that analysed by Ferraris. If Hawley, Julie. 2006. ‘Encircling the arts and sciences’: Brit- so, ontology has travelled from being represented by cate- ish encyclopedism after the French revolution. In Don- gories to being seen through individual documents of any ald, Diana and O’Gorman, Frank, eds. Ordering the world given kind. Consequences of this still remain to be re- in the eighteenth century. New York: Pelgrave Macmillan, vealed. In order to understand new and upcoming ways of pp. 216-43. structuring knowledge, we need further analyses of con- Held, Christoph, Kimmerle, Joachim and Cress, Ulrike. temporary productive forces, and to acknowledge them as 2012. Learning by foraging: the impact of individual determinants of systems of currently legitimate knowledge knowledge and social tags on web navigation processes. claims. In all, the development of the social web corrobo- Computers in human behavior 28: 34-40. rates, in a very clear manner, the proposition that has been Hjørland, Birger. 2008. What is knowledge organization with us for the whole of this exposition: society is the ba- (KO)? Knowledge organization 35: 86-101. sic unit of knowledge organization. Hjørland, Birger. 2011. Is classification necessary after Google? Journal of documentation 68: 299-317. References Lennon, Katherine and Whitford, Margaret. 1994. Knowing the difference: feminist perspectives in epistemology. London: Adams, David. 2006. The système figuré des connaissances Routledge. humaines and the structure of knowledge in the Ency- Machlup, Fritz. 1982. Knowledge: its creation, distribution and clopédie. In Donald, Diana and O’Gorman, Frank, eds., economic significance, Vol II, the branches of learning. Prince- Ordering the world in the eigthteenth century. New York: Pel- ton, NJ: Princeton University Press. grave Macmillan, pp. 190-215. Mustafa El Hadi, Widad, Maniez, Jacques and Pollitt, Ar- Andersen, Jack. 2008. Information criticism: where is it? In thur S. 1998. Structures and relations in knowledge organiza- Lewis, Alison, ed., Questioning library neutrality: essays from tion: Proceedings of the Fifth International ISKO Conference , progressive librarian. Duluth, MN: Library Juice Press, pp. 25-29 August 1998, Lille, France. Advances in knowledge 97-108. organization 6. Würzburg: Ergon. Bacon, Francis. 1953. Advancement of learning; Novum or- Naudé, Gabriel. 1963. Advis pour dresser une bibliothèque. ganum; New atlantis. Chicago, IL: Encyclopedia Britan- Leipzig: VEB édition. nica. Robinson, Lyn and Maguire, Mike. 2010. The rhizome and the tree: changing metaphors for information organization. Journal of documentation 66: 604-13. Knowl. Org. 40(2013)No.6 391 J. Hansson. The Materiality of Knowledge Organization

Rorty, Richard. 1982. Consequences of pragmatism: essays Van Damme, Céline, Hepp, Martin and Siorpaes, 1972-1980. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Katharina, 2007. FolksOntology: an integrated ap- Press. proach for turning folksonomies into ontologies. In Svanberg, Magdalena. 2013. Slutrapport: Deweyprojektet. Proceedings of the ESWC 2007 workshop on bridging the gap Stockholm: National Library of Sweden. between Semantic Web and Web 2.0. Innsbruck, Austria. Svenonius, Elaine. 2001. The intellectual foundation of informa- Wiegand, Wayne A. 1996. Irrepressible reformer: a biography of tion organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Melvil Dewey. Chicago, IL: American Library Associa- Svenonius, Elaine. 2004. The epistemological foundations tion. of knowledge representations. Library trends 52: 571-87. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 2009a. Tractatus logico-philosophicus. Trosow, Samuel. E. 2001. Standpoint epistemology as an New York: Cosimo Books. alternative methodology for library and information Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 2009b. Philosophical investigations. Science. Library quarterly 71: 360-382. Chichester: Blackwell.