The Complexity of Information Science

As I was reading Saracevic’s article on Information Science, I had many different thoughts running through my head.  One of the major thoughts being:  is this article making the concept of information science more complex than it really is?  However, Saracevic does spend a portion of the article discussing different definitions of information science, and breaking it down to help identify what is “information” and what does “information science” entail.  He kept mentioning the complexity of information science, but at the same time, I found many of his explanations well stated.  For instance, “information is an intangible that depends on the conceptualization and understanding of the human being.”  Or, “knowledge is information effective in action.”  Or, “Information is treated as the property of a message.”   It is interesting to put concrete definitions to concepts such as information and knowledge, that can be used in a number of different ways.   In fact, I feel as though the conclusion of the article does a great job of paraphrasing the main fear that the article addresses:  information science will lose the sight of the users, human beings, and focus only on system and not how it is applied to people.  So, I guess it begs the question, is informational science truly that complex?  Or is just the way that it is often presented that leads people to think that it is?