[Sigia-l] Pick a theory (was "IA and Semiotics")

[gunnar]

> Until something is implemented it remains theoretical.
> 
> I'd love to see a counter example to that.

Me too,
although in my book (forgive me for my bad english) a theory is a construction
of thought encompassing a realm - and providing a consistent understanding of
this realm.
I would say that anything not yet implemented is hypothetical.

On some of the comments about IA and Semiotics - and about picking a theory.

For me Semiotics is a Philosophical theory. This means it can encompass some
other theories and ad understanding to the whole.
Another theoretical approach which has real value in information architecture
is cognitive psychology. 

A sign typology like the peircean has little value in my work as long at it is
just about naming the animals. If the task is to make the set of signs - icons
for instance - be consistently of the same kind - then it makes sense to me.
But mostly it can be done faster intuitively.
Peirce is more useful to me when I think in firstness, secondness and
thirdness, when I think in object, representamen and interpretant and when I
think in terms of sign chains. Also the notion of abduction (inference by
hypothesis - as opposed to induction and deduction.)

I have seen however, some junior designers - who were not able to understand
the differences - and who would be willing to come up with a set of icons with
no inherent commonality (like the restroom example I gave a few days ago in
this thread). A little theory can do a lot of good in those cases.


Semiotics comes in many flavours. Social semiotics is one. It is interested in
understanding how social groups of different kinds make meaning from what they
experience and do in their common world, and how it affects their actions.
I see real value in such approaches to IA. Also when we extend it to larger
settings - like sub/micro-cultures and national and civilizational cultures.
Most of the time we do not distinguish a lot. 

I often see references to cultures that read in other directions than left to
right, inuit culture that distinguishes between so and so many types of snow etc..
Much of this is "shibboleth" at worst - and at best just an attempt at not
insulting some imagined percentage of the audience (subscribers to the list).

When I asked about semiotics, I did not know what would turn up. I am curious.
I would like to know if anybody really really uses the theory they struggled
with at the university. If anybody think they have totally gotten rid of it.
If anybody make specific use of theory.

I don't mean theory in the sense that it is not practice yet. I mean theory
which attempts to construct a consistent understanding of the world in a
systematic way.

Maybe I'm just not satisfied with being so "ad hoc" and "this is my
experience" and "my intuition tells me".
I was VERY theoretical at the university.
:-)

Gunnar Langemark
gunnar at langemark.com