Of the mentioned two ways of making definitions, the first one suits the traditional modes of information; the second one (postulation) enables us to design new ones.

   (Although when working under design epistemology we are in principle free to postulate the meaning of a concept in any way we find suitable, in practice the art of concept design is closer to recycling than to re-creation: Instead of creating a completely new expression we keep the existing one, and preserve as much of its traditional meaning as possible, while redefining it to suit the new purposes that need to be served.)

   The design epistemology fosters an approach to academic research that is alternative to the traditional approaches.

   A characteristic result in a traditional approach to research is a “piece in the puzzle” of the worldview of an academic field; its purpose is to make this “puzzle” more whole. A characteristic result in the design approach to research is piece in a different “puzzle”—the one that constitutes our key life-support systems, and in particular our key societal systems (public informing, governance, research, education ...). The art of design is to do something that will make all those systems simultaneously more whole.

   A characteristic result in traditional science is a chemical compound or a new “natural law”. A characteristic result of design research is a prototype—namely a model, implemented in practice, and placed into practice, with the aim of helping real-life systems evolve towards a more whole condition. And to be learned from, and improved continuously.

   The traditional sciences rely on inherited methods (“the scientific method”). The design approach to science has the option to design a methodology.

   A prototype methodology called Polyscopic Modeling  has been designed to illustrate this approach. We use the word polyscopy to refer to the practice that results by applying the Polyscopic Modeling methodology.

4. Definition of Information

Polyscopic Modeling defines information as “recorded experience”, and explains this definition as follows:

(1) The substance of information is human experience; its purpose is to communicate experience and to make sense of experience;

(2) Any record of experience can be considered as information (more precisely, it may be considered as having an information aspect). A chair, for example, is information, because it embodies experience about sitting and chair making;

(3) Any experience worth communicating can provide substance to information, including the “Aha!” effect, and aesthetic and ethical valuations.

The first characteristic of the above definition enables us to secure the wholeness of information—by combining heterogeneous pieces of information emanating from different traditions, both ancient and contemporary, both indigenous and scientific; and by treating the differences in terminology and worldview as modeling artifacts, while showing that those heterogeneous pieces of information reflect same or similar experiences.

   The second characteristic enables us to extend the scope of knowledge-work well beyond the conventional production of text and images, to include the creation of practically anything that systemic wholeness might require.

   The third point enables us to design information that can provide orientation to all other design.

   The historically first result of polyscopy was convenience paradox , where it was shown that convenience (favoring what appears to be pleasant and easy) has a paradoxical and deceptive character, because it fails to take into account the subtle long-term influences that our actions have on our wellbeing (personal wholeness). This result is created by combining insights from a broad variety of traditions. On the more detailed level, the convenience paradox result points at specific ways in which our wellbeing can be cultivated.