A Multi-criteria Approach for Automatic Ontology Recommendation Using Collective Knowledge

2012 ◽  
pp. 89-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Martínez-Romero ◽  
José M. Vázquez-Naya ◽  
Javier Pereira ◽  
Alejandro Pazos
Keyword(s):  
Collective Knowledge

Starting points for therapeutic change

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-128
Author(s):  
Claudio Scarvaglieri
Keyword(s):  
Societal Perspective ◽  
Therapeutic Change ◽  
Psychodynamic Therapy ◽  
Second Step ◽  
Change Processes ◽  
Collective Knowledge ◽  
Patient’S Experience ◽  
Client Centered Therapy ◽  
Therapy Sessions ◽  
Crucial Part

Based on a corpus of 70 tape-recorded therapy sessions (client-centered therapy, psychodynamic therapy), this paper presents analyses of therapists’ interventions that have the potential to trigger change processes. Using a conversation analytic approach, we identify utterances that re-formulate the patient’s experience from a different perspective. In a second step, we draw on concepts from cognitive and pragmatic linguistics, mainly “frame” and “category”, to analyze the conceptual side of these rewordings. We show that, besides processes of general abstraction, the conceptualization of the patient’s experience from a societal perspective is a crucial part of the rewordings. The verbal re-framing creates a potential for accessing stocks of societal knowledge that would not have been accessible based on the patient’s initial, individualistic and often erratic presentation of events. By changing the wording an experience is referred to, the therapist thus creates links to established collective knowledge about experiences of this category. Once such links to collective knowledge have been created, it then becomes possible to understand differently how the experience in question came to pass, which features it is characterized by and how it can be dealt with in a way that is collectively known to be helpful.

Scientific Collaboration and Collective Knowledge

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Particle Physics ◽  
Scientific Practice ◽  
Collaborative Work ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Collective Knowledge ◽  
Interdisciplinary Field ◽  
Social Structure Of Science ◽  
Contemporary Science ◽  
The Social

Descartes once argued that, with sufficient effort and skill, a single scientist could uncover fundamental truths about our world. Contemporary science proves the limits of this claim. From synthesizing the human genome to predicting the effects of climate change, some current scientific research requires the collaboration of hundreds (if not thousands) of scientists with various specializations. Additionally, the majority of published scientific research is now coauthored, including more than 80% of articles in the natural sciences. Small collaborative teams have become the norm in science. This is the first volume to address critical philosophical questions about how collective scientific research could be organized differently and how it should be organized. For example, should scientists be required to share knowledge with competing research teams? How can universities and grant-giving institutions promote successful collaborations? When hundreds of researchers contribute to a discovery, how should credit be assigned—and can minorities expect a fair share? When collaborative work contains significant errors or fraudulent data, who deserves blame? In this collection of essays, leading philosophers of science address these critical questions, among others. Their work extends current philosophical research on the social structure of science and contributes to the growing, interdisciplinary field of social epistemology. The volume’s strength lies in the diversity of its authors’ methodologies. Employing detailed case studies of scientific practice, mathematical models of scientific communities, and rigorous conceptual analysis, contributors to this volume study scientific groups of all kinds, including small labs, peer-review boards, and large international collaborations like those in climate science and particle physics.

The Geography of Insight

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Foley
Keyword(s):  
Collective Knowledge ◽  
Key Features

This book, based on a philosopher’s experiences as dean over almost two decades, argues it is appropriate for the sciences and humanities to have different aims and for the values informing their inquiries also to be different. It maintains there are four core differences: (1) it is proper for the sciences but not the humanities to seek insights not limited to particular locations, times, or things; (2) the sciences but not the humanities value findings as independent as possible of the perspectives of the inquirers; (3) the sciences should be wholly descriptive while the humanities can also be concerned with prescriptive claims, which give expression to values; and (4) the sciences are organized to increase collective knowledge, whereas in the humanities individual insight is highly valued independently of its ability to generate consensus. Associated with these differences are secondary distinctions: different attitudes about an endpoint of inquiry; different notions of intellectual progress; different roles for expertise; different assumptions about simplicity and complexity; and different approaches to issues associated with consciousness. Taken together these distinctions constitute an intellectual geography of the humanities and sciences: a mapping of key features of their epistemology. In addition, the book discusses the role of universities in an era attached to sound bites and immediately useful results, and the importance of there being a healthy culture of research for both the sciences and humanities, one that treasures long-term intellectual achievements and whose presiding value is that with respect to many issues it ought not to be easy to have opinions.

scholarly journals The Evolution of City-as-a-Platform: Smart Urban Development Governance with Collective Knowledge-Based Platform Urbanism

Land ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
Palmyra Repette ◽  
Jamile Sabatini-Marques ◽  
Tan Yigitcanlar ◽  
Denilson Sell ◽  
Eduardo Costa
Keyword(s):  
Urban Development ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Local Governance ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Collective Knowledge ◽  
Digital Revolution ◽  
Knowledge Based ◽  
The Government ◽  
The City

Since the advent of the second digital revolution, the exponential advancement of technology is shaping a world with new social, economic, political, technological, and legal circumstances. The consequential disruptions force governments and societies to seek ways for their cities to become more humane, ethical, inclusive, intelligent, and sustainable. In recent years, the concept of City-as-a-Platform was coined with the hope of providing an innovative approach for addressing the aforementioned disruptions. Today, this concept is rapidly gaining popularity, as more and more platform thinking applications become available to the city context—so-called platform urbanism. These platforms used for identifying and addressing various urbanization problems with the assistance of open data, participatory innovation opportunity, and collective knowledge. With these developments in mind, this study aims to tackle the question of “How can platform urbanism support local governance efforts in the development of smarter cities?” Through an integrative review of journal articles published during the last decade, the evolution of City-as-a-Platform was analyzed. The findings revealed the prospects and constraints for the realization of transformative and disruptive impacts on the government and society through the platform urbanism, along with disclosing the opportunities and challenges for smarter urban development governance with collective knowledge through platform urbanism.

scholarly journals Securitisation gaps: Towards ideational understandings of state weakness

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Kevork Oskanian
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Collective Knowledge ◽  
State Action ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
State And Society ◽  
Interpretive Approach ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Republic

Abstract This article contributes a securitisation-based, interpretive approach to state weakness. The long-dominant positivist approaches to the phenomenon have been extensively criticised for a wide range of deficiencies. Responding to Lemay-Hébert's suggestion of a ‘Durkheimian’, ideational-interpretive approach as a possible alternative, I base my conceptualisation on Migdal's view of state weakness as emerging from a ‘state-in-society's’ contested ‘strategies of survival’. I argue that several recent developments in Securitisation Theory enable it to capture this contested ‘collective knowledge’ on the state: a move away from state-centrism, the development of a contextualised ‘sociological’ version, linkages made between securitisation and legitimacy, and the acknowledgment of ‘securitisations’ as a contested Bourdieusian field. I introduce the concept of ‘securitisation gaps’ – divergences in the security discourses and practices of state and society – as a concept aimed at capturing this contested role of the state, operationalised along two logics (reactive/substitutive) – depending on whether they emerge from securitisations of the state action or inaction – and three intensities (latent, manifest, and violent), depending on the extent to which they involve challenges to state authority. The approach is briefly illustrated through the changing securitisation gaps in the Republic of Lebanon during the 2019–20 ‘October Uprising’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document