A presentation of knowledge creation issue based on epistemology and conceptual spaces. Reference to Goodman, Gärdenfors, Hautamäki, Kaipainen

1. Knowledge creation as a core of
innovation processes
EJC2010 Conference
Jyväskylä 31.5.-4.6.2010
Antti Hautamäki
Research professor
Agora Center
University of Jyväskylä

2. The characters of innovation
• Innovation is introducing something new
and useful.
• It is
– process: idea -> invention -> implementation -> impact
– recombination of existing assets
– emerging of new ideas in thinking
– social thinking and communication
– answering questions
– knowledge creation

3. Different concepts of knowledge
creation
• Correspondence theory: knowledge is an
adequate description (reflection) of reality
• Kantianismi: knowledge emerges by applying
categories to experience
• Perspectivism: a conceptual framework carves a
part of reality or defines a viewpoint to reality
• World creation: we create worlds by different
media (verbal, visual, musical, gestural).

4. Kant
• Distinction between a noumenal and a
phenomenal world
• The noumenal world exists but cannot be
grasped directly by human thought
• The phenomenal world is grasped by our
senses mediating through conceptual
schemas or categorial frameworks
• Categories are universal, necessary
preconditions of thought

5. Perspectivism
• F.Nietzsche:
– Rejection of the distinction between the noumenal
and phenomenal world
– We can construct the world in different ways
– All description of the reality are made from a certain
perspective
• Scheme-content dualism and conceptual
relativism
• Conceptual schemes are
– A) the principle for organizing the elements of our
experience in different ways
– B) sets of basic beliefs we have about the world

6. Worldmaking (N. Goodman)
• We are constructing worlds by our symbolic systems
(words, pictures, sounds)
• There is no true version of the world (the “reality”)
• Worlds are made from other worlds by
– Composition and decomposition
– Weighting
– Ordering
– Deletion and supplementation
– Deformations
• “If worlds are as much made as founded, so also
knowing is as much remaking as
reporting” (N.Goodman, Ways of worldmaking, 1978, p.
22)

7. Two issues of knowledge creation
• Concept formation
– Similarities
– Abstractions
– Definitions
• Combining complementary knowledge
– Identifying perspectives
– Merging perspectives into synthesis
– Learning new things
– Finding solutions to problems

8. Concept formation
• A conceptual space approach (Hautamäki 1986,
Gärdenfors 2000)
• A conceptual space (CS) is XDI where
• I is a set of determinables (attributes)
• Di is a set of determinates (values) for each i in I
• XDI is a Cartesian product of sets Di
• An example
I = {color, form, length,…}
color = {red, blue, yellow,…}
form = {round, ellipse,…} …
• Concepts are subsets of conceptual space

9. Illustration
X
“Apple”
An entity in the topic
Conceptual space “Apple”
• Form: round,
• Color: green, red,…
• Weight: 20-60 G
• ….
A representation
of the entity in CP
Form: round
Color: green …

10. Perspectives
• Hautamäki 1986
– A perspective P (or viewpoint) is a selection of determinables:
– P is a subset of I
– Say P = {color }
– P defines a strict subspace XDI/P of XDI
• Hautamäki, Kaipainen (forthcoming)
– A perspective P gives weights to determinables
– P = {w1, w2,…} where wi is in [0,1]
– P defines a “fuzzy” subspace of XDI
• Two Implications:
– different perspectives can be compared
– identity is relative to a perspective P: X =P Y

11. Two layered perspectivism
World
Topic A conceptual
space
XDI
Subspace
1. Selection of I and Di’s
(ontological perspective)
2. Selection of
relevant set of determinables
(epistemic perspectives)
Subspaces
relative to P

12. Knowledge of an agent
• Knowledge is relative to conceptual
spaces and perspectives
• Let XDI be a conceptual space and P a
perspective adopted by an agent A
• A uses the concepts definable in the
subspace XDI/P to express his/her beliefs
about a topic T
• Therefore XDI/P is the cognitive DNA of A
about T

13. Complementary knowledge
• Let we have two agents A and B with cognitive
DNA based on the same CS but different
perspectives PA and PB
• The notion of complementary knowledge can be
defined in many ways
• The one used in Hautamäki 1986 is that
knowledge of agents A and B is
“complementary” if PA and PB are overlapping
• Then we can form the synthesis of A’s and B’s
knowledge, leading to new knowledge

14. Different DNA’s, topic computers
• A is a professional in
computer technology
• PA includes
– CPU
– Operating system
– Speed (MHz)
– Openness
– Ports …
• B is a designer
• PB includes
– Easiness of use
– Design (color, form)
– Applications
– Support
– WiFi readiness …

15. Multi-agency innovation process
1. Searching agents with complementary
knowledge (cognitive DNA)
2. Creating a common language by fixing a joint
CS fitting with “subspaces” of agents
3. Sharing perspectives (persuasion)
4. Forming a synthesis of perspectives
5. Creating new knowledge based on the
synthesis
6. Opening new possibilities to solve problems
(innovation)

16. Summary
• Innovation emerges by connecting
complementary knowledge
• We can use exact tools from logic and
mathematics to represent knowledge
• Conceptual space approach is promising
allowing to study the cognitive base of concept
formation
• We can compare complementary perspectives
and knowledge based on them

17. Literature
• Goodman N. (1978): Ways of worldmaking. Sussex: Harvester
Press.
• Gärdenfors P. (2000): Conceptual Spaces; On the Geometry of
Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Hautamäki A. (1986): Points of view and their logical analysis. Acta
Philosophica Fennica, Vol. 41.
• Hautamäki A.:A Conceptual Space Approach to Semantic Networks,
Computers & Mathematics with Applications 23 (1992), 6-9, March-
May, s. 517-526.
• Kaipainen M. & Hautamäki A.: Epistemic pluralism and multi-
perspective knowledge organization, Explorative conceptualization
of topical content domains. Knowledge Organization vol. 38 no. 6
2011 (November), 503-514 (2011).
• Kaipainen M., Normak P., Niglas K., Klippar J. & Laanpere M.
(2008): Soft ontologies, spatial representations and multi-
perspective explorability. Expert systems 25(5).