How Information First Became a Thing: Early Developments in the United States and Soviet Union

Until about 1950 usage of the word “information” was inextricably connected with the act of communication. Yet today we are used to thinking of what Michael Buckland called “information as thing.” The paper explores the process by which information was first conceptualized as a thing, which we argue took place among American computer engineers in the early 1950s. The Soviet Union provides a contrasting case, in which a more active, cybernetic concept of information remained dominant within computing culture.Jusqu’à environ 1950, l’utilisation du mot « information » était intimement liée à l’acte de communication. Par contre, de nos jours, nous sommes habitués de penser à ce que Michael Buckland appelle « l’information comme chose » (information as thing). Cette communication explore le processus par lequel l’information a d’abord été conceptualisée comme chose, ce qui, selon nous, s’est produit chez les ingénieurs informatiques aux États-Unis, au début des années 1950. L’Union soviétique offre un contraste intéressant, où un concept d’information plus actif, cybernétique, est demeuré dominant dans la culture informatique.

Multiple objectivity: an anti‐relativist approach to situated knowledge

PurposeThe paper aims to describe the inadequate nature of both “mono‐objectivist” approaches, which deny any role of social influence in science, and relativist social constructions, which fail to distinguish between science and pseudoscience. It outlines an alternative conceptual framework that allows for the possibility of social construction of science, while preventing epistemological relativism.Design/methodology/approachThe study utilizes the cybernetic concept of recursion to show how science can bend back on itself, investigating its own foundations, without undermining its ability to improve our empirical understanding of the world. The paper makes use of several case studies to define specific mechanisms that show how the process of knowledge production in science can steer a course between reduction to a single “right answer,” and fragmentation into subjective interpretations.FindingsThe paper concludes by showing how the cybernetic recursion of multiple objectivity can also be applied to cybernetics itself. In particular, it suggests that such recursive investigations allow us to reconsider the Law of Requisite Variety, and envision an alternative form that can better account for the complexity that arises in self‐generating systems.Research limitations/implicationsThe research is unlikely to be of use to scientists looking for epistemological proof of singular right answers, or social constructivists looking for proof of epistemological relativism.Practical implicationsThe paper suggests that researchers in constructivism need not limit their work for fear that it will lead to relativist conclusions.Originality/valueThis paper fulfils an identified need to offer an alternative to current developments in the field of science and technology studies.