Minds and Machines

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 71–83 | Cite as

Relevant Information and Relevant Questions: Comment on Floridi’s “Understanding Epistemic Relevance”



Floridi’s chapter on relevant information bridges the analysis of “being informed” with the analysis of knowledge as “relevant information that is accounted for” by analysing subjective or epistemic relevance in terms of the questions that an agent might ask in certain circumstances. In this paper, I scrutinise this analysis, identify a number of problems with it, and finally propose an improvement. By way of epilogue, I offer some more general remarks on the relation between (bounded) rationality, the need to ask the right questions, and the ability to ask the right questions.


Subjective relevance Semantic information Questions Erotetic logic (Bounded) rationality 


  1. De Clercq, K., & Verhoeven, L. (2004). Sieving out relevant and efficient questions. Logique et analyse, 47(185–188), 189–216.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Fitelson, B. (2008). Goodman’s “new riddle”. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 37(6), 613–643.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Gabbay, D., & Woods, J. (2003). Agenda relevance, in ‘Agenda relevance. A study in formal pragmatics’. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 155–193.Google Scholar
  4. Hawthorne, J., & Bovens, L. (1999). The preface, the lottery, and the logic of belief. Mind, 108(430), 241–264.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Wiśniewski, A. (1995). The posing of questions: Logical foundations of erotetic inferences. Dordrecht, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Logic and Philosophy of ScienceVrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations