Information science (IS) has incorporated a number of distinct disciplines into its mainstream and peripheral research including library science, information technology, sociology, communications, computer science and artificial technology (Holland, 2005). On the other hand, pure science adds to scientific knowledge but doesn't have practical users (Wikipedia, 2007). The purpose of this work is to analyse any similarities and difference between information science and pure science to disagree to a certain extend and agree to a lesser extend that information science is a better devil than pure science. The discussion is based on characteristics of the two disciplines and how they contribute in the day to day activities of the people. Basically the definitions of information science and pure science are to be given.
Saracevic (1992) define IS as a field devoted to scientific inquiry and professional practice addressing the problems of effective communication of knowledge and knowledge records among humans in the context of social institutional and /or individual uses of and need for information. Hawkins (2001)in Zins (2006) identify IS as an interdisciplinary field concerned with the theoretical and practical concepts, as well as the technological, laws and industry dealing with knowledge transfer and the sources, generation, organization, representation, processing, distribution, communication and uses of information as well as communications among users and their behavior as they seek to satisfy their information needs. Zins (2007) suggested that IS is broadly concerned with the creation, dissemination and utilization of knowledge. IS conceived as a hermeutic-rhetorical discipline, studies the contextual pragmatic dimensations with which knowledge is shared positively as information and negatively as misinformation particularly through technical forms of communication (Cappuro, 2000 in Tudjman and Mikelic, 2003) A comprehensive definition of IS by Taylor 91996) in Bates (1999) hinted that;
“The science that investigates the properties and behaviour of information, the forces governing the flow of information, and the means of processing information for optimum accessibility and usability. The processes include the origination, dissemination, collection, organization, storage, retrieval, interpretation and use of information.”
From the given definition the writer concludes that IS is a field of study that deals with the collection of information and communicating it as a profound phase that stimulates development and productivity in the knowledge economy.
Pure science however has been defined as the gathering of new information through discovery of a new fact and principally adds to scientific knowledge but does not have practical users (Johnson, 1994). Other profound definitions of pure science suggest hat it is systematic observation of natural phenomenon solely for the discovery of unworn laws relating to facts (Anderson, 2002). Mulder (2009) concluded that pure science is synonymous with basic research and it includes a method of investigating nature by the experimental method in an attempt to satisfy the need to know. Basically pure science is concerned with creating new understanding to clear facts through experiments to bring discovery such as in chemistry and physics.
To a lesser extend IS in a better devil compared to pure science because it present information to the enquirer thereby stimulating the mind to solve ambiguous facts. The dichotomy of information science from pure science presented by the given definitions show that pure science is concerned with discovery of new facts and explain them to the society whilst IS is concerned with presenting the information to the user and facilitating easy retrieval using well designed systems. Thus scientists are interested with researching in the pursuit of new knowledge (Mulder, 2009). A distinction that exists was hinted by Cappuro (2000) in Tudjman and Mikelic (2003) that: “IS, conceived as a hermeutic-rhetorical discipline, studies the contextual pragmatic dimensions within which knowledge is shared positively as information whilst pure science is perceived as a means of creating knowledge through laws and defined methods.”
Although a distinction that exists that IS is interdisciplinary in nature intertwining with and having relations with other disciplines and basically the relations are always changing. Bates (19990 concur with Saracevic (2001), Tudjman and Milekellic (2003) that information science is a field that cuts across or is orthological to the conventional academic disciplines and deal with distinct parts of the transmission of human knowledge with the storage and retrieval of ii in recorded form. IS classified as a meta-disciplines is distinguished by the fact that it is interested in the subject matter of all conventional disciplines concerned with that subject matter that is of value for society. Zins (2006) precisely state that IS concentrate on the objective domain focusing on the meta-knowledge aspects of objective knowledge, particularly on its technological and mediatory aspects. IS as a meta-discipline incorporate library science, documentation, knowledge organisation, and information retrieval and information systems to effectively contribute to the information society.
The above sentiment from various authors make IS a better devil to pure science to a certain extent that so far has been revealed by the given definitions. Further connotations by Zins (2007) that IS is focused on the meta-knowledge perspectives of universal knowledge provide a strength for IS over pure science which only seek to discover. Zins (2007) added that IS;
“. . . is the study of mediating perspectives of universal knowledge (i.e. human knowledge in the universal domain). The mediating perspectives include cognitive, social and technological aspects and conditions, which facilitate the dissemination of knowledge from the originators to the users.”
Even though IS may seem to be better; its activities depend greatly on pure science and scientists who are the creators of knowledge. Basically IS becomes a better discipline in that it transmit the discovered knowledge to the user.
A second characteristic of IS identified by Saracevic (2002) that IS is inexorably connected to information technology (IT) make it intertwine with pure science which is making great use of IT in all its processes and computations. The birth of new trends information publishing has dramatically changed the field of IS through proliferation of information in various format necessitating the urgency to come up with intelligent systems to enable information indexing and retrieval. Equally important in IT is pure science that allows unlimited publishing and discovery of new knowledge. According to Mulder 92001) pure science keeps new ideas and discoveries flowing through utilizing new technologies and breakthroughs that can often lead to spin-offs that revolutionalise everyday life. The area of IT connects pure science to IS in the quest for informing the information society of new ideas. Anderson (2007) firmly believes that the world of fast computation massive data storage and fast electronics has been built on the works of sciences that work to bring all things together in a scientific but social platform. In actual fact the IT component present in both disciplines provide an easy, fast and cost effective means of communicating basic knowledge based on discovery of unknown laws on well controlled experiments and deductions from demonstrated facts or truth.
IS seem better in that it works toward making efforts that recorded information both electronic and print is collected, organized and retrieval mechanism in place for users to effectively utilise discovered by scientists. On the other hand pure science concern is that new knowledge and facts should be available to explain different situations in everyday life. The bottom line for pure science is to create new knowledge through a number of experiments and computations that took time and require vast funding and dedication from the scientist. IS sometimes referred to as a soft science which eventually would conclude that to certain extend may not be a better devil after all. Anderson (2005) affirms that pure science and information science are potentially equal as they use different methods to come up with solutions. Mulder (2009) concluded that pure science aims at knowledge and is concerned with theoretical constructs ordered towards knowing, while information science as also an applied science aims at practice and in concerned with theoretical constructs ordered towards practice. The writer’s conclusion is that both are absolutely essential for the progress of science as well as maintaining an informed and knowledgeable society.
The basis of the discussion has been built on the definitions given at the onset, analysing the crucial components of each and relating them to the areas of service. Several authors agree that information science is interdisciplinary concerned with the collection of information, organising and making it available to the users. Meanwhile pure science for instance chemistry and physics is determined to bring new discoveries to influence the activities of information and daily life. Certainly pure science and information science complement each as stated by Anderson (2005) that both are absolutely essential.
Reference
Mulder, H. (2009) Pure science versus applied science: what’s the difference. Available at http://www.scienceandyou.org/aarticles/ess_og.shtml (Accessed 19/03/2011).
Bates, Marcia J. (1999) “The Invisible substrate of information science.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science, vol. 50; no. 2, p. 1043 – 1050.
Holland, G. (2008) “Information science: an interdisciplinary effort?” Journal of Documentation, vol. 64; no. 1, p. 7 – 23.
Saracevic, Teflo (2002) Information science: origins, evolution and relations. Available at http://comminfo.rutgers.edu/~kantor/601/Readings2004/Week2/w2R1.PDF (Accessed 22/03/2011).
Anderson, P. (2005) Pure science versus applied science. Available at http://vonscience.blogspot.com/2005/08/pure-science-versus-appllied-science.html (Accessed 22/03/2011).
Tudjman, M. and Mikelic, N. (2003) “Information science: science about information, misinformation and disinformation.” Informing Science: InSITE-“Where parallels Intersect”. Available at http://www.informingscience.org/ (Accessed 18/03/2011).
Zins, Chain (2006) “Redefining information: from “information science” to “knowledge science.” Journal of Documentation, vol. 62; no. 4, p. 447 – 461.
Zins, chairn (2000) “Toward a theoretical framework for information science.” Informing Science: Special Issue on Information Science Research, vol.3; no. 2.
