Library and Information Science

Library and Information Science ISSN: 2435-8495
三田図書館・情報学会 Mita Society for Library and Information Science
〒108‒8345 東京都港区三田2‒15‒45 慶應義塾大学文学部図書館・情報学専攻内 c/o Keio University, 2-15-45 Mita, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8345, Japan
Library and Information Science 84: 1-21 (2020)

原著論文Original Article

図書館情報学における存在論の対立Gnoliの存在論的複数主義とHjørlandの存在論的一元論の比較Ontological Conflict in Library and Information Science: A Comparison of Gnoli’s Ontological Pluralism and Hjørland’s Ontological Monism

筑波大学図書館情報メディア系Faculty of Library, Information and Media Science, University of Tsukuba ◇ 〒305–8550 茨城県つくば市春日1–2 ◇ 1–2 Kasuga, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305–8550, Japan

受付日:2019年11月28日Received: November 28, 2019
受理日:2020年3月31日Accepted: March 31, 2020
発行日:2020年12月26日Published: December 25, 2020




Purpose: This article aims to discuss the relationship between philosophy and library and information science from an ontological point of view.

Method: This study applies a literature-based analysis to library and information science. Gnoli’s articles on ontological pluralism and Hjørland’s articles on ontological monism are compared and examined.

Results: Three points of contention between Gnoli’s pluralism and Hjørland’s monism are identified. The first is whether dualism in the philosophy of mind is unscientific. The second concerns what comprises a document. The third is how to think about abstract entities. Regarding these issues, the following three points are clarified. First, dualism and pluralism in the philosophy of mind cannot be easily dismissed as unscientific. Second, while Gnoli seeks to acknowledge mentefacts as abstract entities, Hjørland believes that it is sufficient to consider documents as material entities, so the conflict between dualism and monism in the philosophy of mind is not the only problem when considering ontology. Third, the question of abstract entities cannot be answered conclusively by their own arguments. However, a comparative review of the arguments of Gnoli and Hjørland provides clues to resolving these issues in ontology. The key is whether we can solve the research problems in library and information science as well as provide satisfactory explanations of the field’s central phenomena.

This page was created on 2020-08-31T17:05:59.836+09:00
This page was last modified on 2020-12-10T15:22:17.000+09:00