Data Information Knowledge Wisdom

This week, I conducted an extensive rewrite of a Wikipedia article on the DIKW model (here's what it looked like before I got my fingers on it), in anticipation of a series of posts critiquing the claims of  information processing, especially as these are taken up by cognitive psychology and, in particular, evolutionary psychology.  

As currently conceived, these forthcoming critique posts will argue that information processing:  (i) commits the fallacy of macro quanta; (ii) commits the fallacy of low redefinition; (iii) fails to account for significant phenomena; and (iv) engages unnecessarily in a form of neutral monism.  My intent is to use the currency of the DIKW model--in information science, library science, and business circles--as a foil to the suppositions of information processing.  

However, in the process of updating the DIKW model, I learned two things:  (1) that the model as taught and the model as understood are animals of decidedly different coats; and (2) that University of Arizona associate professor Martin Frické has recently published an article critiquing DIKW (a preprint version is also available).

So, before I write my critique of information processing, I'm going to devote some time to reading and processing Frické's critique of DIKW, incorporating his insights into the Wikipedia article on the same topic, and very likely writing a response to his article.    

This post is simply to whet the appetite for what is in store.