Monthly Archives: October 2016

Classification is important because we can combine certain ideas or objects, into a structure we can use to make comprehension easier. What I mean by this is, we basically put our ideas or objects into a form to differentiate them. We are categorizing, to make sense of the world. According to Wrights book, “In other words, the categories themselves are transmitted though culture, but the human brain is born ready to receive the transmission” (Wright, p. 31). Basically Wright is portraying we share our beliefs as through categorization (marriage, religion etc.), but we do so in a way that comes from our birth with predisposition cognition. As we grow up we naturally and culturally learn to see the world in groupings called classification. In exact relation to classification, there are levels of it. Conforming to Wright, “A taxonomy in its simplest form, is a system of categories that people use to organize their understanding of a particular body of knowledge” (Wright, p. 23). Taxonomy is a system in which such categories can organize ideas. Taxonomy as a whole stems from many years ago as a hierarchy system, giving rise to new forms of classification

Taxonomy can not only be manipulated in the form of a hierarchy, but as a social construct. Folksonomy according to Dye, is a form of social control categorization. Nowadays people can use folksonomy as a way to categorize their interests by tagging. What I mean by this, is there is no larger network in control. When an individual tags something such as to a photo or blog, the power of categorizing is in their hands. In regards to Dye her article proposes “users have control over which labels are applied to what…” (Dye p. 1). Folksonomy can be debated as whether it is an accurate and efficient form of classification. For example Dye explains Weinbergers view on traditional taxonomy vs folksonomy. He says, “the trunk is the central organization, and the leaves are the individual pieces of data” (Dye, p. 2). The argument is traditional taxonomy apparently, should always have the upper hand. It holds the organization together, while folksonomy is only pieces of the larger system. It is debatable of how classification is important, through the focus of 2 different systems.

In addition to these focuses, Badke describes just how classification can be used as a research strategy. In his book, in chapter 4 he discusses the difference between researching with keywords vs. a controlled vocabulary. For example in explaining keyword classification, “search engines are not intelligent creatures…they don’t know when the actual results are irrelevant, even though those results contain your search words” (Badke, p. 72). In a sense, keyword searching is not efficient to get enough info about a topic. He then describes using a system of classification as controlled vocabulary. For example, “Controlled vocabularies, unlike keywords, get at what the data is actually about….with controlled vocabularies, you have to use the subject terms provided by the system” (Badke, p. 80). With controlled vocabularies such as on EBSCO host it is easy to find information quicker, however you have no control over power of the system. He also explains metadata which is a system of categorization under databases that is a short description of data. This is under controlled vocabularies. As a whole, classification is important in many ways, depending on how it is used by humans.