Purpose: In line with the cognitive viewpoint on the phenomenon of information, the constructivist tradition based on Maturana and Varela’s theory of knowing, and some aspects of Shannon’s theory of communication, the purpose of this paper is to shed more light on the role of information, data, and knowledge in the cognitive system (domain) of the observer. Design/methodology/approach – In addition to the literature review, a proposed description of the communication and knowledge acquisition processes within the observer’s cognitive system/domain is elaborated. Findings: The paper recognizes communication and knowledge acquisition as separate processes based on two roles of information within the observer’s cognitive system, which are emphasized. The first role is connected with the appropriate communication aspects of Shannon’s theory related to encoding cognitive entities in the cognitive domain as data representations for calculating their informativeness. The second role involves establishing relations between cognitive entities encoded as data representations through the knowledge acquisition process in the observer’s cognitive domain. Originality/value – In this way, according to the cognitive viewpoint, communication and knowledge acquisition processes are recognized as important aspects of the cognitive process as a whole. In line with such a theoretical approach, the paper seeks to provide an extension of Shannon’s original idea, intending to involve the observer’s knowledge structure as an important framework for the deepening of information theory.

Key words: constructivism, data, communication process, information, knowledge, knowledge acquisition process, cognitive process, cognitive viewpoint.

Excerpt: Der Begriff „konstruktivistisch“ gehört gegenwärtig sowohl in der Didaktik wie in den Grundlagenwissenschaften zu einem der am heftigsten diskutierten Begriffe. So sieht We1nert in einer puristischen Anwendung dieser Sichtweisen eine Sackgasse für künftige Forschung (Weinert 1996, S. 10); Klauer (1999) fragt, ob es sich bei diesen Sichtweisen nicht um „alten Wein in neuen Schläuchen“ handele, und Hoops führt die Konjunktur des Begriffes darauf zurück, dass es zur Zeit „chic [seif], ‚Konstruktivist‘ zu sein“ (Hoops 1998, S. 229). Nach Einschätzung Gerstenmaiers und Mandls handelt es sich dagegen bei den gemäßigt konstruktivistischen Sichtweisen „um den vielleicht vielversprechendsten Rahmen für eine Analyse und Förderung von Wissenserwerbsprozessen in den unterschiedlichsten sozialen Kontexten“ (Gerstenmaier/Mandl 1995, S. 883/884). Die Diskussion verläuft dabei interdisziplinär in der Philosophie, Neurobiologie, Soziologie, Psychologie und Pädagogik; sie wird ausgesprochen kontrovers, teilweise auch, insbesondere in ihren erkenntnistheoretischen Facetten, polemisch geführt. Die zunächst in den USA geführte Diskussion hat längst auch die deutsche Erkenntnistheorie, Psychologie, Pädagogik und in jüngster Zeit verstärkt auch die Fachdidaktiken erreicht. Im Bereich der Lehrerfortbildung und der zweiten Phase haben konstruktivistische Theorien zur Zeit Hochkonjunktur.

The issues of the semiotics of observer and point of view are examined within a broad semiological and cognitive perspective. Structuralist narratology attempted at formal-linguistic classification of points of view to avoid anthropomorphic-visual connotations inherent in narratological terminology. The alternative option would be using terms-metaphors as theoretical models. From the point of view of the observer, the process of text generation evolves in the double perspective of perception/ conception and interpretation. Instead of comparing different media in terms of a privileged metalanguage, it would be more fruitful to base the comparison on their cognitive characteristics.

This paper reviews ideas developed by the late Gordon Pask as part of his conversation theory (CT). CT uses theories of the dynamics of complex, self-organizing systems, in conjunction with models of conceptual structures, in order to give an account of conceptual coherence (for example, of a theory or a belief system) as a form of organizational closure. In Pask’s own terms, CT is concerned both with the kinematics of knowledge structures and the kinetics of knowing and coming to know. The main features of modelling conceptual structures and processes used by Pask are presented. We continue by presenting a summary two-cycle model of learning, aimed to capture some of Pask’s key insights with respect to conceptual coherence and the organizational closure of conceptual systems. Parallels are drawn with other work in epistemology, classic cybernetic studies of self-organization, and the concept of autopoiesis. The two-cycle model is then applied recursively to generate learning cycles and conceptual structures at different levels of abstraction, as a contribution to the work of Pask on the topology of thought. Finally, the model is applied reflexively. That is, its own form is considered as a topic for conversation and conceptualization. Carrying out such a reflection provides a coherent way of characterizing epistemological limits, while retaining a clear sense of there being an (in principle) unlimited praxeology of awareness.

Excerpt: Without communication there can be no hut-flan relations, indeed no human life. Communication theory cannot therefore be confined to examining only certain sectors of life in society. It is not enough to engage in exhaustive discussion of particular techniques of communication, even though, because of their very novelty, such techniques and their consequences are attracting special attention in contemporary society. It is equally inadequate to begin with a discussion of concepts. That would serve a useful purpose only if one already knew what the concept was intended to achieve and in what theoretical field it was to be applied. But no consensus on such points can be assumed, and I shall therefore begin by distinguishing two different theoretical approaches whereby a scientific theory can be constructed

Questions concerning the nature and origin of living systems and the hierarchy of their evolutionary processes are considered, and several problems which arise in connection with formerly developed theories – the autopoiesis of Maturana & Varela, the POL theory of Haukioja and the earlier developed evolutionary theory of Csányi – are discussed. The organization of living systems, the use of informational terms and the question how reproduction can enter into their characterization, problems of autonomy and identity are included in the list. It is suggested that replication – a copying process achieved by a special network of interrelatedness of components and component-producing processes that produces the same network as that which produced them – characterizes the living organization. The information “used” in this copying process, whether it is stored by special means or distributed in the whole system, is called replicative information. A theoretical model is introduced for the spontaneous emergence of replicative organization, called autogenesis. Autogenesis commences in a system by an organized “small” subsystem, referred to as AutoGenetic System Precursor (AGSP), which conveys replicative information to the system. During autogenesis, replicative information increases in system and compartment(s) form. A compartment is the co-replicating totality of components. The end state of autogenesis is an invariantly self-replicating organization which is unable to undergo further intrinsic organizational changes. It is suggested that replicative unities – such as living organisms – evolve via autogenesis. Levels of evolution emerge as a consequence of the relative autonomy of the autogenetic unities. On the next level they can be considered as components endowed with functions and a new autogenetic process can commence. Thus evolution proceeds towards its end state through the parallel autogenesis of the various levels. In terms of applications, ontogenesis is dealt with in detail as an autogenetic process as is the autogenesis of the biosphere and the global system.

Excerpt: I have recently realized that several of the ideas I have been working with since the early 1980s might have been derived in part from Uexküll’s Theoretical Biology (1926). So this work can be viewed in retrospect as a seminal text in evolutionary systems discourse. This text shows early indications of, at least, internalist discourse, scalar and speci®cation hierarchy theories, semiotics, systems science, the information/dynamics dichotomy, developmentalism, as well as the social construction of knowledge. In this article I will be concerned mostly with relating Uexküll’s concerns to internalist discourse (e.g., Matsuno 1989; Kampis and Roessler 1990). In this regard, I will make a Peircean semiotic interpretation of Uexküll’s central theory of function cycles. Then I will try to relate what appears today to be the major sign of Uexküll’s work – the Umwelt – to externalist concepts in ecology. Finally, I will take up the implications of Uexküll’s work for the social construction of knowledge.

Closure has been used in various ways. I propose a classification based on the specification hierarchy formalism, wherein ideas are represented as subclasses, or restrictions, of other ideas, beginning with the most generally applicable concept and working inward to more particular applications. This exercise is part of a revival of nineteenth century natural philosophy. The classification also represents a self-referential developmental system in which the classification itself emerges from the evolutionary process it describes. Since one form of closure builds upon a previously attained form, development traces a loss of evolutionary potential even as each closure gives access into a new, emergent, realm.

This paper compares two different accounts of closure to explain biological organization: as an organization enabled by an informational control on dynamics (Pattee) and as an internal closure of a dynamic nature (Varela) The two of them adopt different versions of a principle of complementarity to relate symbolic and dynamic explanations.