Dialogues between sociocultural issues and knowledge organization systems

• Autor(a) principal: Moreira, Walter [UNESP]
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: Sabbag, Deise
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/245772
• topic: Knowledge organization systems; Knowledge organization; Cultural studies; Social issues

The necessary ontological basis for knowledge organ-ization systems (KOS) is structured on an epistemolog-ical basis and as is increasingly required in the context of critical knowledge organization studies, on a cultural basis. Thus, KOS must be discussed in terms of their social impacts, either directly or indirectly, visible, or not. The following questions are raised as general re-search problems: how to recognize and incorporate cultural diversity in KOS? How do recognize its applied dimension in the construction of documentary repre-sentations? KOS that are not inclusive fail in their fun-damental purpose, which is the socialization of knowledge. The neglect of the cultural variables in-volved in the production and organization of knowledge makes the system oppressive or irrelevant, in both cases expendable. Thus, the objective is to understand the new requirements formulated for knowledge organ-ization systems in accordance with the interests of the cultural perspective of knowledge organization. To do this, the construction of a critical-reflexive text based on the elements indicated by Hjr rland and Pedersen (2005) and summarized in Hjr rland (2008) as founda-tions for a classification theory is adopted as a meth-odological parameter. Thus, the ten principles listed by these authors are systematized into five dimensions of analysis related to the conception of the classificatory structure as a key component of KOS, they are: objec-tivity/subjectivity; ontological basis; sociocultural base; the domain as a guiding element; social effects of clas-sification. It is concluded that the incorporation of cul-tural diversity into KOS requires attention to, at least, three elements that, although easily identifiable, prove to be extremely complex in their pragmatic aspect: a) the mapping and recognition of the different sociocul-tural perspectives through which a given concept can be observed; b) the incorporation of this diversity into the SOCs by making the classification structure that supports it more flexible; c) the explanation of the points of view adopted in the construction of the SOC.