Reducing task’s redundancy – the strategy of Faculty of Pharmacy Library to centralize all scientific research

Introduction – Based on a previous project of University of Lisbon (UL) – a Bibliometric Benchmarking Analysis of University of Lisbon, for the period of 2000-2009 – a database was created to support research information (ULSR). However this system was not integrated with other existing systems at University, as the UL Libraries Integrated System (SIBUL) and the Repository of University of Lisbon (Repositório.UL). Since libraries were called to be part of the process, the Faculty of Pharmacy Library’ team felt that it was very important to get all systems connected or, at least, to use that data in the library systems. Objectives – The main goals were to centralize all the scientific research produced at Faculty of Pharmacy, made it available to the entire Faculty, involve researchers and library team, capitalize and reinforce team work with the integration of several distinct projects and reducing tasks’ redundancy. Methods – Our basis was the imported data collection from the ISI Web of Science (WoS), for the period of 2000-2009, into ULSR. All the researchers and indexed publications at WoS, were identified. A first validation to identify all the researchers and their affiliation (university, faculty, department and unit) was done. The final validation was done by each researcher. In a second round, concerning the same period, all Pharmacy Faculty researchers identified their published scientific work in other databases/resources (NOT WoS). To our strategy, it was important to get all the references and essential/critical to relate them with the correspondent digital objects. To each researcher previously identified, was requested to register all their references of the ‘NOT WoS’ published works, at ULSR. At the same time, they should submit all PDF files (for both WoS and NOT WoS works) in a personal area of the Web server. This effort enabled us to do a more reliable validation and prepare the data and metadata to be imported to Repository and to Library Catalogue. Results – 558 documents related with 122 researchers, were added into ULSR. 1378 bibliographic records (WoS + NOT WoS) were converted into UNIMARC and Dublin Core formats. All records were integrated in the catalogue and repository. Conclusions – Although different strategies could be adopted, according to each library team, we intend to share this experience and give some tips of what could be done and how Faculty of Pharmacy created and implemented her strategy.

Aristotelian predicables, universality and realism: the logic of comparison in topics as denying the view that Aristotle was a realist

Aristotle is reportedly held to have been a Moderate Realist in that he would maintain that a concept derives from an act of grasping a mind-independent universal object that exists somehow inside of the many different things which the concept is predicated of. As far as a universal is independent of mind, it would stand for the proper object of a concept that subsumes a given number of things as its own instantiations. But we claim that Aristotle rejected such a view and instead did perceive and comprehend universality as a feature of thought rather than as a feature of reality in its own right. As showed in the chapters of Topics regarding the so-called logic of comparison (with the support of Albert the Great’s commentary), each predicate can be more or less consistent with the attribute of the subject of which it may be predicated. Both essential and accidental attributes assume a definite degree of being related to the degree of belonging to substance. Unlike particular things, the universality of a concept is to be understood always in comparison with another concept according to a hierarchy of predicates in terms of universality degree arranged by comparative terms such as ‘more’, ‘less’, and ‘likewise’. What is really mind-independent are the truth conditions which make a universal true when exclusively referring to a set of things identically meant by the same predicate whose universality is given by the place occupied in the hierarchy of predicates.

Stirner – on the brink of scientific thought

Stirner and Feyerabend, despite being historically a hundred and fifty years apart, seem to have been of the same mind in revolting against the methodological explaining of what cannot methodologically be explained. Stirner attempted an explanation in a more intuitive version, Feyerabend in a more sophisticated one. For both thinkers it is obviously important to sustain dissent with the assumption that method is the one and only vital promoter of scientific progress. They equally voice the opinion that, despite science itself producing inconsistencies as well as results, its proceedings nonetheless follow a certain rationale. But to codify a definite approach to phenomena or matter i.e. to establish a definite method for taking a look into things turns science into religion and scientists into believers. As a result no new insights are to be gained.