I'd like to take the boring liberty of ignoring Scott's smileys, to make a
serious point, hoping that it's not to elementary.
Yes, the borges-animals stuff can be a revelation (or perhaps better
classified as an epiphany?:-) ) But I think that when one has got beyond
that awakening, it becomes a commonplace.
Yes, everyone tends to make their own classification schemes, but more
importantly I believe, groups tend to have a collective sense, if not of
exactly how to classify things, then at least of the things that are
significant. Any particular classification scheme will tend to have
importance among just those people who use it. That isn't, in my book, a
reason to be sceptical about such schemes, but to maintain awareness that
no classification scheme is either absolute, or indeed truly general-purpose.
The answer, I suggest, is to use more classification schemes, not fewer.
Anyone can potentially use DDC, UDC, Library of Congress etc; medics can
use MeSH; etc, etc. The more ways that one classifies something, the more
useful connections one can potentially make, as long as the classifications
are true to the purpose and intent of each particular scheme. Forget the
"formality" of schemes; just use them as schemes that a particular group of
other people have found useful.
On the other hand, I see very little point in adopting, or using,
idiosyncratic classification schemes except for classifying private
collections, or, say, organising one's own filing system. And, fine, if
anyone tries to claim that their classification scheme is the best general
purpose one in the world, either tell them they've got the wrong end of the
sitck, or if you haven't got the energy, just ignore them.
Simon
At 23:08 2005-03-09, Scott Wilson wrote:
>Heheh... you know, perhaps we just need to embrace chaos, adopt the
>'folksonomy' approach, let everyone classify stuff according to personal
>whim, and just get out to the beach more :-)
>
>See also Michel Foucault's "The Order Of Things" and "History of
>Sexuality" (among others) for some ammunition to throw at formal
>classification :-)
>
>- S
>
>PS: I like this classification scheme the best:
>http://www.multicians.org/thvv/borges-animals.html
>If you create a registry, make sure you put it in :-D
--
Simon Grant, of North-West England
http://www.simongrant.org/home.html
Information Systems Strategist
http://www.inst.co.uk/
|