Unified Theory of Information (UTI)
| Collection | GlossariumBITri |
|---|---|
| Author | José María Díaz-Nafría Wolfgang Hofkirchner |
| Editor | Wolfgang Hofkirchner |
| Year | 2010 |
| Volume | 1 |
| Number | 1 |
| ID | 88 |
| Object type | Theory |
| Domain | Research and Practice |
| es | Teoría Unificada de la Información |
| fr | Théorie Unifiée de l'Information |
| de | Vereinheitlichte Theorie der Information |
Although the Anglo-Saxon term was used by Kerns Powers (1956) “to provide a unified mathematical theory for the treatment of the statistical processes by which information is conveyed in communication systems”, it is now used in a more ambitious proposal that in contrast to Power is not limited to the syntactical level. The UTI aims at a theoretical articulation embracing all processes and structures related to the creation, transformation and the crystallizing out of information in cognitive, communicative and cooperative contexts, by means of (a supposedly feasible) blending of the concepts of self-organization and semiosis (self-re-structuring, self-reproduction, self-re-creation).
The purpose of achieving a comprehensive theory is to enable society to cope with the challenges of the so-called information society. A transdisciplinary development is pursued – nourished by notions developed in the cross-disciplines of informatics, cybernetics, systemics and evolutionary theory, as well as in disciplines of life sciences, psychology, and social and human sciences like semiotics. This approach has been advanced by Peter Fleissner, Wolfgang Hofkirchner, Norbert Fenzl, Gottfried Stockinger and Christian Fuchs. They did so by taking up, while modifying, positions of Michael Conrad, Pedro Marijuán, Koichiro Matsuno, Tom Stonier, Søren Brier, John Collier, Dail Doucette, and others. Most of the scholars named above have been contributing to the building up of a new Science of Information, though they might differ in the feasibility of a unified theory (Capurro et al. 1999, Hofkirchner 2008, Marijuán 2008).
Capurro and Hjørland (2003) criticize this approach as having a metaphysical rather than a scientific status insofar as “a view of the whole of reality that is not possible for a finite observer” is assumed.
References
- CAPURRO, R., FLEISSNER, P., & HOFKIRCHNER, W. (1999). “Is a Unified Theory of Information Feasible? A Trialogue”. In Hofkirchner, W. (Ed.), The quest for a unified theory of information. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach. pp. 9-30. [Online] <http://www.capurro.de/trialog.htm> [Consulted: 10/07/2007]
- CAPURRO, R., HJØRLAND, B. (2003). “The Concept of Information”, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Ed. B. Cronin, 37(8), 343-411.
- HOFKIRCHNER, W. (Ed.). (1999) The quest for a unified theory of information. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Foundations of Information Science. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach.
- HOFKIRCHNER, W., STOCKINGER, G. (2003). “Towards a Unified Theory of Information”. In: 404nOtF0und, 1(24). [Online] <http://cartoon.iguw.tuwien.ac.at/zope/igw/menschen/hofkirchner/papers/InfoConcept/article/article.html> [Consulted: 20/07/2009]
- HOFKIRCHNER, W. (2008). “How to Achieve a Unified Theory of Information”. In: Díaz Nafría, J. M., Salto Alemany, F. (eds.), ¿Qué es información?, León: Universidad de León.
- MARIJUÁN, P. (2008). “The advancement of Information Science. Is a new way of thinking necessary?”. In: Díaz Nafría, J. M., Salto Alemany, F. (eds.), ¿Qué es información?, León: Universidad de León.
- POWERS, Kerns (1956). A Unified Theory of Information. Cambridge. USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.