Page 71 - Journal of Library Science in China, Vol.45, 2019

070 Journal of Library Science in China, Vol.11, 2019

of application, while the library science studies the law of librarianship and its components.
Rooted in practice, the library science theory is at a higher level and mentors practice. With the
promotion of informatization, the content and curriculum of the library science has been extended.
In any event, its core content will not be abandoned. Two extant inclinations should be avoided.
One is sticking to traditional fields, indifferent to other content closely related to the core content.
The other is overzealousness for “chic” fields, neglecting the status quo of the library and related
fields. The later inclination overlooks the core content and value of the library science, lacking
in consciousness of foundation and independent thinking. Instead, it follows the herd and acts
capriciously. Hence we should stick to the core fields. At the same time we should also extend
based on the core fields. For instance, the author has been studying academic evaluation and
standards which belong to the public research field arousing interest in various disciplines, and has
published research findings which have found some echoes. In fact, the two fields are developed
out of the core content of the library science—resource construction, especially the evaluation and
collection of academic resources as well as authority files in information organization.
The content of the library science has extended with the librarianship and its components as
main research objects, but not limited to the library community. In such a case, the over 200-year-
old name “Library Science” may not be the most appropriate in view of recruitment, allocation and
social impact. It makes people misunderstand that the library science is only concerned with the
library or work flow of the library. From a utilitarian angle, some students and parents (including
administrators and scholars) look at the library on a superficial level, considering it as the place
to lend books. They also have misunderstandings about the library science. Compared with
mathematics, physics, chemistry, politics, economics and the science of law, the library science is
considered distinct or secondary, which results in disadvantage of the library science in recruitment
and allocation. The name of the discipline does not correspond to its research content, whereas it
is better to keep it before a more appropriate and widely accepted name comes into being. A more
appropriate name hinges on communication with library professionals home and abroad. The new
name will have a greater impact with the consensus of the library community, which requires
time and cannot be achieved by force. In another angle, the name has also advantages because
the library science research is supported by tens of thousands of libraries and similar institutions.
“People do not deny that an earthworm, a leaf, eating and sleeping can be objects of scientific
research. How come they deny the library as an object of scientific research despite the fact that
it has existed for thousands of years and played a role in social lives?” Liu Guojun (2002), a well-
known library expert, asked over 60 years ago. Different disciplines discuss the laws of different
things with the objective of aspiring after truth which is equal. “Everyone is equal before the
truth.” Biology and zoology that study a leaf and an earthworm respectively are equal to the library
science that studies documents, readers, management, technologies and the librarianship, and also
equal to economics that studies commodities and commerce. Mr. Liu got the Doctor of Philosophy
degree in the United States and took courses in the library science. Returning back to China, he