„Confutation" of the „Ortega hypothesis" by citation analysis II. A case study of citatum criticism

Abstract

This second part of the two-part study presents the literature effect of a peculiarly dilettantish 'literature case" consisting of the non-adequate pseudo-scientific „confutation" of a one-sidedly constructed and to Ortega ascribed false hypothesis — this „confutation" counting indexed-for mai citations and analysing them in a formal-numerical way - as well as of a subsequent non-meri tor ious discussion of this „confutation"; hereafter the study analyses critically this effect in the light of the real — not only the indexed - references of the indexed recipient articles, which contain the indexed citations of the 5 publications (constituting the „case") showing in this way even formally the effect of the „literature case". The author analyses with a new method the all 88 real referring acts of the 69 indexed recipient articles related to the „literature case", that is, the complete stock of individual citations of the „case", correcting in this way the inadequate and deficient data of the Citation Indexes. Treating the members of the stock as citations and references, i. e. in a complex way as „citata", he subjects their content to an essential analysis and going beyond the philological context he dissects and judges their mentái connections with the „literature case" as a mentái problem. He arranges the meaning of each citátum, analysed and judged from 9 points of view, in the type-forming categories of a preconstructed special classification system, then creates from the numerical code characters of this system a code which synthetises and expresses the meaning of the single citátum in a kind of formula. On the basis of the numerical codes of the individual citata an analysis and judgement of the effect of the „literature case" in the literature from several aspects and in varying depths became possible. On the basis of the essential analysis revealing the meaning of the relevant citata of the recipient articles the study has shown that the „literature case" - being pseudo-scientific in its source and peculiarly dilettantish — has a far-rcaching effect in the literature in respect of the system of sciences but, considered from the point of view of epistemology and science theory, this effect is superficial in a dilettantish-untechnical way. Although this effect presents itself in most various little parts of the scientific literature, which are equally distant both one from another and alsó from the essence of the „case" as mentái problem, while being incompetent from epistemological point of view too, nevertheless, this „case" exerted an influence mainly on the disciplines of „scientometrics"—„sociometrics of science"— ,,citation analysis"-„information science" and on their literature — all these being intervowen by many strings - (reckoning to these alsó the activity of „organization and administration of science" and its literature); after all this peculiar. Literature case" remained an „internal affair" of these knowledge systems and of their literature. At the same time the literature of the philosophkal disciplines, being most competent concerning the essence of the „case" as a mental problem, did not notice of the pseudo-scientific „confutation" of the false hypothesis. The recipient literature receiving the influence of the „case", while being more or less competent concerning some aspects or momenta of it," deals in its majority not with the essence of the „case" as a mentái problem and the majority of their citata does not grasp the mental momenta constituting this essence. Among the articles accepting the effect of the „case" - this being peculiarly untechnical and pseudo-scientific in its source — no one payed attention to the false and one-sidedly constmcted character of the „hypothesis" ascribed to Ortega and to its anti-Ortega meaning, and only one of the recipient articles (referring to the book of Ortega too) has interpreted and reviewcd correctly - in its negatíve meaning citátum — the true conception of Ortega. The majority of the scientific literature receiving the influence of the „literature case" accepted without scruples the dilettantish „refutation" of the false „hypothesis", which did not even refer to the true conception of Ortega and were in no way adequate to it; while the citata of negatíve meaning do not bring in connection - in their majority - their judgement with the mentái momenta constituting the essence of the problem. The untechnically constructed and to Ortega ascribed false „hypothesis" as well as its untechnically constructed „refutation" exerted after all in an adequate manner, that is, untechnically and superficially an effect on the indexed scientific literature which has accepted this influence. Our case study has alsó cast light upon the fact that the formal-numerical „citation analysis" carried out with the data of Citation Indexes does not provide a true picture even of the referring conditions of the literature and it happens not infrequently that ülusive phenomena wil! be proved as existent, while the essential analysis of the citata is suitable for a true analysis of the scientific literature and sometimes it makes alsó its cricital treatment possible.