Even today, there are very few direct philosophical essay s written in librarianship. Most contributions are in the form of discussions of specific issues, related to the specific aspects of librarianship, or as a plea for the development of a broad philosophy.

Hence, a philosophy of librarianship exists, but is not well expressed (Lane, 1935). It cannot exist in a vacuum; its goals are constantly challenged since librarianship is a journey not a destination; no one is a librarian, everybody is becoming one (Mumford, 1966). The philosophy that exists refl ects a variety of environments, different human values, and their interpretations by individual librarians (Reddy, 1970). It includes topics such as historical influences, social roles, citizenship responsibilities, and psychology of readers: it is conceived as a map of knowledge (Wheeler, 1946). Among the variety of general philosophical statements, each is often presented as a unique viewpoint, while most of them together may constitute the bases for a philosophy of librarianship. It is up to each librari an to select the approach closest to his own philosophical outlook (Marco, 1966). In summary, there is a need for rethinking library principles.

In this section I ask the question: What are the epistemological nature, metaphysical meaning, and ethical value of librarianship? And I review library literature in search of philosophical answers to them.

6.1.1 Scope of the Philosophy of Librarianship
In 1931 Borden argued for a philosophy as a necessary part of research in lib rarianship, which would study the relationships between different aspects of the discipline. "The mere doing of the research may yield something in the way of training and technique but the conclusions will sound hollow without a philosophy to back them up."1

Danton's plea for philosophy of librarianship, made in 1934 and often cited, was the first call for a description of aims, functions, and meaning of library services. Put together, these descriptions would provide general c oncepts of librarianship, serving as the bases for its philosophy. This could be accomplished through series of studies on individual aspects of the discipline. He also hoped, that a consensus on the world view of librarianship would lead to the development of the field's own metaphysics in spite of the fact that librarianship was viewed in the context of social philosophy at the time (Danton, 1934).

Among other early writers, Ranganathan adopted a philosophical approach that was limited to the s ervice aspect of librarianship only, while Butler overlooked the distinction between library science (librarianship) and its philosophy. Danton's second essay addressed the philosophy of the university library and its dependence on the parent institution. He recommended a sociological approach, connecting library philosophy with its function--that is, to be practical, comprehensive, and responsive to patrons' needs (Danton, 1941). Richardson visualized, a philosophy of librarianship that would be based on l ibrarianship as a repository of human knowledge, while Coney expected "a classic statement of the value of library to the society."2

6.1.2 The Need for a Philosophical Approach
Although many librarians are aware of the need for a philosophy of librarianship, there is little agreement as to what it ought to be. The National Commission on Library and Information Science (1974) stated that such philosophy should be based on a common sense of direction and purpose i n national service. Winter (1988) called for a metascience dealing with the organization of knowledge itself, Clayton (1940) expected a philosophy of librarianship to help people realize their abilities, and L. Wilson (1936) felt that librarianship needs an institutional philosophy of education which would serve individuals' needs as well as those of society. Butler (1945) expressed his optimism by hoping that the vagueness of philosophical contributions will be slowly replaced by a need to explain the role of the book and the importance of the library's loyalty to truth, justice, and beauty.

Many writers referred to a need for a philosophy of librarianship as a means for improving the professional status of librarians (Berthold, 1933). Such a philosophy could clarify its uncertain purpose (Wheeler, 1946), validating the library as a discipline with its own scientific method (Danton, 1941), ethical motives (Bliss, 1935), and an intellectual role in society. And, finally, some writers have see n a philosophy of librarianship as a way of providing analyses of subjective judgments of library functions (Carnovsky & McDiarmid, 1934) and of justifying library dedication to facts (Borden, 1931). Others would limit a philosophy to explaining the meaning of the intellectual contributions of innovators such as Dewey, Bowker, or Cutter (Wilson, 1938).

6.1.3 The Value of Philosophy to Librarianship
The application of philosophy to librarianship will provide clearer understanding of i ts functions and limitations. The result would be a more logical distribution of functions between professional, technical, and clerical staff; improved opportu- nities for the use of scientific methodology; and heightened professional unity (Butler, 1951).

Danton (1934) listed a number of advantages for a philosophy of librarianship. It will define the role of library in society; validate librarianship as a discipline; add meaning to library practice; clarify knowledge of pu rpose, thus adding precision to actions; and provide distinctions within librarianship between the varying functions and duties performed by different types of libraries.

Foskett (1973) expanded the advantages by considering the contributions of classifications to the theory of librarianship. He pointed out that librarianship depends on technology, the primary motive of which is not to provide work for machine but to meet human needs. Man needs information to cope with his environment, not only by understanding it better but also by changing it; he acquires knowledge to form rational ideas organized in an ordered and consistent structural system of concepts.

A synthesis of theories culled from other disciplines would provide a major contribution to the theoretical bases of the profession (Shaughnessy, 1976) and would validate practical philosophy in terms of its justification for library operations and its code of ethics (Houle, 1946).

The major purposes of the philosophy of libraria nship, according to Mukherjee, are: (a) to serve as a comprehensive and specialized tool for information and knowledge, (b) to express its social obligations for social services, and (c) to provide a base for research and scholarship (Mukherjee, 1966).

6.2 Major Components in the Definitions of the Philosophy of Librarianship
6.2.1 Introduction
The writers in favor of articulating a philosophy of librarianship were uneasy and unclear as to what it should be. To some i t was not so much a philosophy of librarianship, as a philosophical approach to librarianship, providing ruling principles and statements of aims (Irwin, 1949). To others its focus should not be on the library but on books and readers (R. A. Miller, 1936), by providing a practical -- not metaphysical -- formulation of beliefs and aims. And finally, for some writers, a philosophical approach should make up for a lack of common denominators (L. R. Wilson, 1938).

A philosophy of libraria nship slowly emerges with the maturity of the discipline. It becomes critical analyses of the mission of librarianship (the 'why' of what it is), of its application (how it is being implemented), and of its meaning (the nature of relationships between purposes and methods of performance).

It focuses on interrelationships between society's needs and institutional resources and on its role in scholarship. Scholarship produces books; librarianship provides books as a stimulus for scholarship and learning .

"Librarianship is the management of human knowledge, the most interdisciplinary of all the disciplines -- and because it is concerned with the philosophy of knowledge it is potentially the most deeply philosophical of all the professions" and hence it should address the philosophy of the philosophy of knowledge.3

Philosophy precedes science and offers meaning and direction to research. Its major expression in librarianship is the statement of library purpose. The se arch for a philosophy may begin in the study of library history for past expressions of the beliefs, aims, functions, and objectives that described operations of the library. But it must be constantly reviewed to keep up with the changing society, which requires redefinition of library objectives in terms of the changing environment. We cannot refer to science and factual knowledge for assistance in this matter.

Philosophy is shaped by society, its group interests, and the conflicts between them. It is relativistic in its response to the impact of different cultures. Each culture develops its own theory of librarianship, with its own peculiar philosophy (Rogers, 1984). Jewett expected it to support democracy, but that role is interpreted differently by different writers. For Butler, what is important is the virtue of good citizenship (e.g., he condones some censorship for the good of the society), but for Broadfield the primary function is the protection of freedom of thought (he allows no censorsh ip under any circumstances). Danton takes the middle-of-the road approach; to him, librarianship is like art, requiring intellectual formulation of beliefs, principles, and concepts which are functionally useful (Danton, 1934).

On the other hand, some western writers, especially during the Second World War period, argued strongly against the neutral library viewpoint, believing that the philosophy of librarianship should focus exclusively on democratic ideals, serving as a consultative agent of d emocracy (Peirce, 1951).

Definitions of philosophy of librarianship ought to follow Plato's requirement for understanding the distinction between true reality and its appearance, to use the dialectical method in the critical review of other viewpoints, and to be able to bear up under the scrutiny of cross-examination. The prerequisites for philosophical analysis include the understanding of the nature of phenomena studied and the ideal purposes aimed at. The dialectical methodology used is a com posite of many philosophical interpretations. They include, among others, Bergson's intuition, Wittgenstein's call for uncovering nonsense, Hegelian phenomenological description, Hume's experimental inquiry, and Spinoza's geometric, logical approach.

In general, library philosophy is descriptive, in the sense of providing rational explanation of other theories. It is also prescriptive by suggesting what ought to be the course of action under given conditions. In neither case, however, it imposes its specific interpretation on other viewpoints. Hence, the approach often takes a form of a 'rational reconstruction', one "which is not so much prescribing as drawing attention to a difference" between philosophical and other interpretations of reality, and recommended actions.4

And so, opinions on what the philosophy of librarianship ought to be vary widely. To some, its focus is on ends rather than means (Burke, 1947), but to others it is "a critical discussion of critical di scussions": an exercise in curiosity rather than love of wisdom.5

In the context of this essay, philosophy of librarianship is defined as a systematic attempt to understand the basic concepts related to library and information sciences, by studying the essence, nature, and value of discourses in librarianship.

As shown in the diagram below, library philosophical dialogues can be divided into two major approaches, one addressing physical aspects of library operations, the other its metaphysical nature. The former group focuses primarily on library tools, and the latter stresses the meaning of communicated ideas. Information science is a pragmatic study of information interpreted as processed data; librarianship concentrates on contents of information records.

Fig..6-1: Philosophical dialogue in librarianship

6.2.2 Evolving Objectives of the Library Philosophy 6
Library objectives closely reflect societal objectives of the period. The pattern began in the pre-modern period with the focus on book content, augmented by attempts to enlarge the scope of library influence into an integrative r ole, as a cultural unit within the society as a whole.

Library involvement in the affairs of its community began in the period of Enlightenment with emphases on the value of reading for its own sake. It emphasized the humanistic notion of individual citizens' self-improvement which would in turn strengthen the general will of the society.

The continuous focus on reading as a cure for social maladies was based on a belief that all social problems were caused by violation of the l aws of nature. The improvements in library technology reflected the philosophy of the Industrial Revolution based on the faith in science and technology.

Contemporary preoccupation with the multigroup interest in democratic systems explains the relativism of both political and library philosophy. It calls for an involvement in the affairs of society to minimize ensuing conflicts between group interests. Several specific philosophical axioms applicable to librarianship were identified i n the past. These included tolerance and dedication to service (Foss, 1909), striving for esthetic and ethical environment provided by books and stimulated by the 'love' of them (Bostwick, 1907), and selection based on patrons' needs. The librarian "must be informed not merely as to the books, but as to the reader. He must understand him and what actuates him.".7

It is a mistake "to forget that thinking comes before doing, reflection before action, looking before leaping, know ledge before business . . . [what is needed is] more theory, more philosophy, in short more thinking."8

Knowledge of books should be reflected in reading great literature (Sayers, 1950) and expressed in the power of a good book (Haines, 1950). It should give priority to servicing individual patrons (Broadfield, 1949), should maintain neutrality (McColvin, 1950), and protect intellectual rights and freedom of the library client (ALA, 1948).

There is no clear consensus on the overall approach to library philosophy. Wright wanted it to be metaphysical. Heilprin saw it as an objective approach with objectivity viewed as a method in processing subjective viewpoints. The philosophy should stress completeness (Carter, 1948), or an individual-centered whole system of relations, and should provide a rational explanation of reasons for certain occurrences. It should also include a bookman's 'passion for books'(Powell, 1954).

Many writers emphasized service function of librarianship (Asheim, 1968), based on the principle of 'knowing your community' (Downs, 1969), while others emphasized the importance of production, care, and use of records of knowledge (Meyer, 1925).

Predek wanted the philosophy of librarianship to focus on issues related to education, culture, nation, citizenship, Christianity, and democracy as fundamental ideals (Predeek, 1939).

Lekai advocated a philosophy of a library generalist, best prepared "to show the underlying re lationship between cause and effect in man's progress toward understanding the meaning of things that lies beyond the realization of their variety." 9

In my own writings, I stressed a logical and analytical approach distinguishing between technical, administrative, and planning aspects of librarianship, and focusing on the whole relationships between the generic book and its content transfer to the reader.

6.2.3 Epistemological, Ethical, and Metaphysical Quest ions
Selected answers to the three philosophical questions about librarianship posed at the beginning of this chapter illustrate a variety of different perception of the role of philosophy in defining librarianship.

(1) Epistemological questions concerning the nature of the discipline were answered by visualizing the philosophy of librarianship as:

a) A situational theory in methodology, with unifying roles, goals, and decision-making processes, or focused on su bject matter based on an organized unity and in harmony with library practice (Dimock, 1939), expressed by functional integration theory of organization.

(b) An expanded research into library's 'backgrounds' of history, bibliography, and relations to society, based on validated data and reasonable conclusions (McMullen, 1957). (c) A communication system in general (Bergen, 1967, Orr, 1977); and specifically, as an interpersonal communication and knowledge system (McGarry, 1975).

(d) Both libr ary science and practice considered as gestalt- oriented, applied epistemology. "Each library contains and integrates into some whole gestalt, 'some universe of knowledge'; and each such gestalt is internally differentiated into treatises and books and pamphlets."10

(a) To develop a sociological, relevant theory using scientific methods (Crawford, 1986), to define its social role in terms of overall democratic, educational, and social functions (Borden, 1931), to provide a meaning for library work by identifying it with a professional Weltanschauung (i.e., a philosophy of life) and theoretical base, and to formulate policies reflecting social conditions and needs (Berthold, 1933).

(b) To concentrate on social advocacy by providing services in outreach areas for disabled persons and to speak on behalf of intellectual freedom (Reith, 1984). "Librarian's purpose . . . is basically to do everything possible to encourage a free flow of information and recreation and . . . enlightenment to . . . library users."11 The freedoms defended by librarians include freedom of thoughts (Broadfield, 1949 ) and the freedom to read (Carnovsky, 1950). "Without intellectual freedom a librarian is only a bookkeeper, a storer, a book-handler."12

(c) To accept ethical responsibility for providing qualitative support to community's goals of improving its material and cultural values (Haugh, 1953). The library is at war with 'poverty,' and the librarian is a 'missionary of value of books and libraries' (Gardner, 1964).

(d) As a philosophy of action, based on the 'will to act,' librarianship should focus on planning and on fighting for financial needs. However, the emphasis should not only be on form but also on substance (Orman, 1935, 1940), by contributing to the development of professional consciousness and appreciation of education.13

(a) The role of the library is expressed by applied social philosophy explaining its aims, functions, and reasons for existence (Lane, 1935).

(b) As a post-factum philosophy, it should stress relations of unity among similar facts (Borden, 1931), based on a theoretical model of utility (Burr, 1975), between service, education, and mediation (Nite cki, 1964), and by providing symbioses of individual and institution in an atmosphere of tolerance and perfect impartiality.14

(c) "Librarianship, library science, documentation, bibliography, and information science in the narrow sense . . . , have in common a focus on the written record and the physical documents,"15 but in a metaphysical sense, librarianship is a metascience, not about nature of things, but about ideas about the nature of things (Kaplan, 19 64). It is an art and science of reducing to order various records of words and ideas, organizing and manipulating them for definite purposes in terms of proximate and ultimate ends (Temple, 1949). To Gore (1970), a philosophy of librarianship should be based on skepticism, the approach opposed by Jackson.

(d) Library purposes are seen as tools for providing information and knowledge, addressing an issue of organizational efficiency, and as a social science. The library is responsible for educati ng its patrons through reading. The two often-confused purposes are equally important although often "the librarian wants to be a specialist, dealing with specialists, and finds himself a nonspecialist, dealing with general readers." 16

(e) Philosophy should search for the meaning of library service "as a common basis of unity and like-mindedness . . . of humanity,"17 and explain it to its community, as a help to individuals in their interaction with the marke tplace (Nader, 1974). It should also define library aims, functions, purposes, and meanings in terms of social order (Berthold, 1933), with principles of librarianship serving as guides for the profession (Danton, 1934).

It is a thesis of this book that a satisfactory philosophy of librarianship must be hospitable to the variety of issues discussed in this chapter. A model is proposed later in this book that would attempt just that, by viewing library-related activities on three inter related levels:

(a) empirical, stressing scientific problem-solving methods;
(b) cultural and motivational methods, reflecting the library heritage of dedication to the improvement of physical aspects of human conditions; and
(c) rational analyses of logical relationships between basic axioms of librarianship that give it its meaning.

(a) Kaplan described the nature and role of librarianship as a metascience, not dealing with the nature of reality but with ideas describing that reality. As a social memory of ideas, librarianship's central concepts are structure, order, and form, as contrasted with science's focus on substance and content.

This is the humanistic basis of librarianship: "Everything in the library must ultimately be related to its uses, and these uses in turn must ultimately be dependent u pon the users." 19

In many senses, librarianship is similar to philosophy; the domain of both is the total culture and knowledge, and both philosophy and librarianship are expected "to be prepared under suitable conditions to be helpful with regard to any and every area of human concern."20 Wright (1977) elaborated on the Kaplan notion of a conceptual relationship between philosophy and librarianship by arguing that information per se can be a referent for philosophical studies but not the object of a science, since it is a conceptual not a physical phenomenon and as such it cannot be a subject of scientific study of material reality.21

(b) The distinction between the physical and metaphysical aspects of a generic book was expanded by Ortega22 into the ethical consideration of librarianship's moral obligations to 'tame the book'. "Up until the present, the librarian has been principally occupied with the book a s a thing, as a material object. From now on he must give his attention to the book as a living function. He must become a policeman, master of the raging book."23

The reasons for this new mission are, according to Ortega, threefold:

(1) there are too many books published nowadays, creating a serious problem of retrieval and requiring new approaches to the descriptive and selective bibliographies on specific subjects;
(2) many books are worthless, "a dead weight upon humanity,"23 calling for librarians' control of book production; and
(3) "people read too much . . . the common man . . . does not think over what he has read" and therefore the librarian must direct the patron's reading patterns by becoming "the doctor and the hygienist of reading." Librarians must act as filters of ideas. 24

Asheim (1982) interpreted Ortega's mission of the librarian as 'a filter interposed between man and the torrent of bo oks' in terms of a need to provide "some means for scanning, processing, and selecting -- from the domain of total information -- that part of it which meets each individual's needs."25 Otherwise, the abundance of information available but not fully absorbed will result in information overload and entropy. However, Asheim made a fundamental distinction between two kinds of filters performed by librarians:
(1) original selection in building library collection for potential users, and (2) assistance in meeting specific patrons' individual information needs, "to make it possible for the users to act as their own filters."26

McConnell (1992) praises Ortega for assessing the role of librarianship in the metaphysical framework. Ortega extended the Aristotelian principle of considering librarians qua librarians, i.e., 'in and of itself,' to librarians' professional mission to "be the keepers of the social necessity the book . . . the reason for not only the existence of librarians but their purpose and value as well lies in the very nature of life itself."27