Kristo Ivanov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Kristo Ivanov (born in 1937) is a Swedish-Brazilian information scientist and systems scientist of ethnic Bulgarian origin. He is professor emeritus at the Department of informatics of Umeå University in Sweden.[1]

Biography[edit]

Ivanov was born in 1937 in Belgrade in the former Yugoslavia, and grew up and was educated in Italy and Brazil. In 1961 he moved to Sweden, where he worked as an electronic engineer in the telecommunications and computer industries, with assignments in France and the USA. In 1972 he obtained a Ph.D. degree in informatics at the Department of Computer and Systems Sciences of the Royal Institute of Technology and Stockholm University. He has conducted further studies in political economy, business administration, and statistics, and obtained a degree in psychology at Lund University[1]

His study led to positions at Stockholm University and Linköping University. In 1984 he was appointed to a chair as full professor of informatics at Umeå University. He is professor emeritus since 2002.[1]

From 1991 to 2004 he was scientific advisor to the National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen). In 1997 he was "president elect" of ISSS, the International Society for the Systems Sciences, a position which he later had to relinquish because of other demanding duties.[1]

Work[edit]

In his research and teaching Ivanov focused initially on the application of systems theory to information systems and especially on practical problems of quality-control of information in industrial data bases.

More specifically, his early work concentrated on the issue of accuracy and precision of data bases as they are related to system development and maintenance, where the systems approach is done in terms of socially framed technical systems, conceived as a further development of the "Berkeley school" in the tradition of professor C. West Churchman.[2]

The following are some notable ideas in Ivanov's work which eventually lead to ethical and theological organizational issues with consequences for practical applications. In order to clarify these ideas they will be illustrated with references to Ivanov's own work and to literature upon which it relies.

Quality-control of information[edit]

This was the subject of the doctoral dissertation.[3] It resulted in widened definitions of information accuracy and precision[4] that are grounded in the philosophy of science, especially theory of measurement or metrology,[5] and its elusive but extremely important concept of error,[6] in order to make them applicable in technical systems which are framed in a social context. Quality of data is then seen as the degree of agreement between judgments of data obtained after periodical monitored negotiations in the context of maximum possible disagreement. For this purpose the definition of data itself, i.e. data elements and data structures in a systems context, was widened to conceive data as information and knowledge.[7]

This part of Ivanov's work parallels, and can be seen as a theoretical contribution to groupthink, to the wisdom of crowds and the Wiki-idea itself.[8] It required, however, some reservations for problems of social psychology as implied by the study of popular mind.[9] Its conclusions appear to be relevant also for general data quality, information quality, accuracy and precision, and control of control, the theoretical framework for democratic security and auditing of audit whose importance become obvious in times of financial and political crisis when systemic concepts of effectiveness and progress are put into question.[10] In particular, the concept of quality-control of information contributed to the theoretical base of the so called Scandinavian school of participatory design as related to computer-supported cooperative work by anchoring the politically and ideologically motivated action research which flourished in the seventies to a secure scientific conception of information and systems.[11] The concept emphasizes the fundamental role of disagreement and of what in statistics is known as outliers. In doing so it accounts for the sociopsychological and political personalistic conflict between the individual and the collective.[12]

This early work was supposed to be completed with a comprehensive research program on the essence of computers seen as a capital-intensive industrial embodiment of the formal sciences of logic, mathematics, and geometry. The purpose was to grasp the why and the whither of the formalization of society which is hidden under an aestheticist mask of audiovisual and tactile graphical interfaces and smart human-computer interaction. One main question was whether you should care about what is presupposed and what happens when you press the button, the keyboard's tangent, or touch the screen, while innocently assuming that you are just communicating or interacting.[13] Or is it a matter of naively understood trust?[14] The research program could not be realized except for the production and survey of an extensive bibliography which was made available to the research community.[15]

Hypersystems[edit]

This was a further development of the concept of social systems of the Berkeley school mentioned above, with the intent to prevent that its applications in systems design be reductively transformed into other approaches such as communicative action in the Kantian tradition, participatory design or co-design in the liberal tradition, conflict in the Marxian tradition or, lately, phenomenological and post-phenomenological postmodernism (and perspectivism, as in postmodern philosophy), social networks, actor-network theory (and its "non-modernism"), and design aestheticism.[16]

Security[edit]

Ivanov views the problem of political power as related to privacy or personal integrity, freedom of speech, rule of law, and ethics, where the clash between privacy and security, supposedly mediated by participatory practices, portrays in terms of political science a fruitless and hopeless clash between socialist and liberal ideologies which lack a "vertical" spiritual dimension.[17]

Cultural criticism[edit]

In later years the emphasis switched to the furthering of systems thinking in face of perceived cultural decline of society, with emphasis on universities and research. This is cultural criticism of inadequate uses of the system concept as well as criticism of some modern and postmodern trends in research and development of computer applications, under labels such as critical theory, phenomenology, design, or sheer eclectic ad hoc theoretical frameworks. Ivanov perceives that they are often misused to downplay not only economic and political realities but also, and mainly, ethical concerns. His criticism follows from his summarizing statement about the future of the systems approach and its limitations when technology and science lead to philosophy, and further to ethics and theology.[18] Therefore, as emeritus, Ivanov pursues research on current trends of informatics and science to be explained or countered by an understanding of the interface between information, philosophy of technology, and theology.[citation needed] In this respect, and except for his adduction of theology which he shares with West Churchman, Ivanov may be seen as working along a stream of earlier criticism of the ideology of computer culture. Ivanov is convinced of the necessity of an explicit relation between theology and ethics in systems philosophy and practice, in order to avoid that technology remains an "excuse for questionable ethics" in the computer-supported edutainment and financial games of affluent societies.[19]

Publications[edit]

Ivanov published numerous articles and a few books, a selection:

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d Further biographical details.
  2. ^ Ivanov acknowledges (see further references in this article) that he has been partially influenced by Churchman's work as it is summarized in Churchman, C. W. (1971), The design of inquiring systems: Basic principles of systems and organization, New York: Basic Books, and Churchman, C. W. (1979), The systems approach and its enemies, New York: Basic Books.
  3. ^ Ivanov (1972).
  4. ^ Overriding by means of these two basic concept other unmeasurable analogues or derivatives like validity, reliability, dependability, correctness, timeliness, exactness, usefulness, consistency, authenticity, completeness, degree of detail, recency, controllability, goodness, trueness, relevance, pertinence, acceptability, refinement, approximation, currency, rightness, coverage, etc.
  5. ^ As summarized by Churchman, in the The design of inquiring systems, op.cit., chapter 9 on "Singerian inquiring systems".
  6. ^ With some historical roots in Mach, E. (1976). Knowledge and Error: Sketches on the Psychology of Enquiry (Vienna Circle Collection, Volume 3). New York: Reidel - Brian McGuinness. German orig. Erkenntnis und Irrtum: Skizzen zur Psychologie der Forschung, 1905. Complexity increases well beyond probability and statistics with the analysis of chance as in Massimo Negrotti (Ed.) (2008). Yearbook of the artificial: Natural chance, artificial chance. (Vol. 5). Bern, New York, Oxford: Peter Lang. (ISSN 1660-1084, ISBN 978-3-03911-476-4. See e.g. Galván, J.M. The case in Christian theological anthropology, pp. 129-141.) In a research report whose English title is From statistical control to control of statistics (1976), Ivanov summarizes such insights with a powerful quote from Clarence Irving Lewis "Knowledge has two opposites, ignorance and error.", Lewis, C.I. (1929) Mind and the world order: Outline of a theory of knowledge.
  7. ^ Ivanov (1995)
  8. ^ Wiki-Collaborative Web Application
  9. ^ The subtitle of a classic by Gustave Le Bon (1895). English transl. The crowd: A study of the popular mind. Available on the Internet. Cf. Søren Kierkegaard's criticism of "Publikum" as crowd in Two Ages: A Literary Review (1846), translated as Kierkegaard, S. A Literary Review, Penguin Classics, 2001, ISBN 0-14-044801-2.
  10. ^ To appreciate the complexity of effectiveness, controversially synonym of efficacy as acknowledged in Ivanov's as in Churchman's work, see Jullien, F. (2004, orig. 1996) Treatise on efficacy, Univ. of Hawaii Press, incorporated into Ivanov, K., & Ciborra, C. U. (1998). East and West of IS. In W. R. J. Baets (Ed.), Proc. of the Sixth European Conference on Information Systems ECIS'98, University of Aix-Marseille III, Aix-en-Provence, June 4–6, 1998. Vol. IV (pp. 1740-1748). Granada & Aix-en-Provence: Euro-Arab Management School & Institut d'Administration des Enterprises IAE.
  11. ^ Ivanov. (1995).
  12. ^ As conceived by Ivanov under the avowed influence of Carl Jung, cf. Two Essays on Analytical Psychology, CW 7, §§ 234-240, Princeton Univ. Press, 1966. See also Argumentum ad populum, Groupthink, and Political correctness.
  13. ^ Stivers, R. (1999). Technology as magic: The triumph of the irrational. New York: Continuum. (ISBN 0-8264-1211-4.)
  14. ^ Shapin, S. (1994). A social history of truth: Civility and science in seventeenth-century England. Chicago and London: The Univ. of Chicago Press. Esp. chap. 8 on "Invisible technicians".
  15. ^ See the program overview titled Essence of computers & presuppositions of support at Ivanov's research Website.
  16. ^ Ivanov's criticisms are found, for instance, in Ivanov (1991) and Ivanov (2001) Regarding design estheticism that followed and replaced Marxian trends in Scandinavia, Ivanov adduces the critique of post-Marxian aestheticism by Norris, C. (1990). What's wrong with postmodernism: Critical theory and the ends of philosophy. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. (Esp. pp. 16-30, 77-133, 263-282.) Ivanov perceives trends in computer and information science (where the design concept is grounded in design theory rather than systems theory) as related to variants of the intuitionism impersonated by Henri Bergson, or to problematic revisions of Aristotelian phronesis as expounded by Aubenque, P. (1993). La prudence chez Aristote, avec un appendice sur la prudence chez Kant [Prudence according to Aristotle, with an appendix on prudence according to Kant]. Quadrige/PUF. (First ed. 1963.)
  17. ^ Ivanov, K. (1986). Systemutveckling och rättssäkerhet: Om statsförvaltningens datorisering och de långsiktiga konsekvenserna för enskilda och företag [Systems development and rule of law: On the computerization of public administration and it long-run consequences for citizens and business]. Stockholm: SAF. (ISBN 91 7152 404 5.)
  18. ^ Ivanov, K. (2001). The systems approach to design, and inquiring information systems: Scandinavian experiences and proposed research program. Information Systems Frontiers, 3(1), 7-18. Abstract and orders.Original research report.
  19. ^ The quoted expression is from the title of Ivanov's colleague, Mowshowitz, A. (2008). Technology as excuse for questionable ethics. AI & Society, Volume 22 (3, January), pp. 271-282. An overview of Ivanov's latest and ongoing research is available on the Internet.

External links[edit]