While Madonna may have been on to something in her assertion that, "We are living in a material world," the time of the material world has come and gone. While we produce more and more in this physical, tangible reality, the best way for us to compile, document, and learn from our new discoveries and evolving technologies is to turn the material world into an intangible, digital one.
Marine Biology Labs creations, uBio is one complex example in a string of projects to translate everything we see and know about our tangible, physical world into a compendium of human knowledge that is somewhat cataloged, but not entirely definite in its parameters. The system itself is attempting to embed all of the common data for each and every taxonomic classification that exists in the plant and animal world. This daunting task could never have even been envisioned before the advent of the computer, and even now scientists and biologists continue to struggle to name and define these species because in creating any one definition they are inherently excluding other creatures from being included in the category.
Scientists are being labelled "accidentalists" rather than "essentialist" because of their disregard for lumping large categories of classifications. Instead, the trend is to now accept even minute differences as evidence of evolution and new species development. Every little accident in the evolution of a species is now considered a further reason to recognize the individuality of the species and classify it as such.
Yet, while they struggle with classifications they are also including all of the known names for each plant/animal whether it is recognized as an official title or not. This compilation of human knowledge forms such a tangled web of information that it will continue to become a useful source of reference. But, because nothing is ever truly definable, the system will never truly be complete. All we can do is add to the collective knowledge and postpone the inevitable task of setting parameters and delineating boundaries between data.
(Aside) It's actually fascinating to me that in order to cope with the unimaginable amounts of data that we are managing in the world, that we are clinging to systems of barcodes, ISBNs, and other systems in order to manage the identification of every piece of imaginable data. We have no alternatives to identifying these "things" except by assigning arbitrary identifiers to them. In a world where all we want to do is move away from labeling things and preventing the relationships between data from being known- we absolutely must use these arbitrary means in order to keep the data miscellaneous and accessible. (I wonder what Mortimer Adler would think of that!)
In many ways, this system is much like the approach taken in the development of Wikipedia. Users are continually giving input for an endless number of pages, however, to some degree it seems that Wikipedia may have more of an official role because they make conscious decisions to include, exclude, or edit data that is added to the site. It seems that uBio is entirely open to including any and all information that it can find without judgement or restraint- truly, a Third Order approach to organization.
The all inclusive approach in many ways also reminds me of Google searches- although, Google too is filtered and impacted by businesses wishing for better search results. Overall, besides similar systems in development (and forever in development) there is really nothing else that compares to uBio and its brethren sites. These compendiums of human knowledge are truly what we have always envisioned the internet to be. Quite literally, everything there is to know at the click of a mouse or the tap of a screen.
As librarians, we are beginning to face the challenges presented in these other areas of knowledge compiling. Much as the biologists are facing ever more tiny differences and delineations in their classifications, we too are faced with the challenges of naming, defining, and classifying ever more information- be it books, ebooks, digital music, CDs, DVDs, Blu Ray, the list goes on and on. Within each item goes down and down further specifications for identification and classifying the individual materials. We now also face the difficulties of recognizing the information generated on the internet.
How long will it be now before blogs of authors become referenced materials, or before news and media digital files become stored and archived for access through libraries or other sources. As we move forward into the world of third order classification, where will the line be drawn between what is and isn't necessary to add to the compendium of knowledge? Should we be filing away information about each individual person living on the planet? Will there one day be a current file of information pertaining specifically to me?
Essentially, anything that can be documented can technically be contributing to the increased knowledge of society, of psychology, anything really. Because we are a part of this world, we impact it, it impacts us, and it is all intertwingled together. Where does it end? Does it ever? Should it? I can hardly begin to fathom the questions- to understand the implications of such data, but it is something that is on the horizon for this digital world.
No comments:
Post a Comment