This paper deals with the influence of mediation in different kinds of virtual environments, for example virtual conferences (e-conferences, CISSE), e‐learning platforms, distance learning environments and surroundings, and Internet Relay Chat (IRC) and user interfaces. Mediation is a means in which messages, discussion and behavior are becoming more and more conceptual and abstract and have an effect on our social being. Mediation effects on our capability to make independent ethical decisions. The same process is discerned in all the social and commercial practice where it is rationalized by processing techniques or when it’s made virtual. Mediation is studied from different perspectives or viewpoints in a phenomenological manner. A mean person could call mediation vitiation or nullification, but that is value judgment. The term quantification as well as modeling and regulation also describe some aspects of mediation. Classical philosophy will be applied in this study, which is an opening in “mediational ethics’. An empirical case study (Tritonia Academic Library) dealing with distance learning is also presented in this paper.


Mediation eSocieties Virtuality e-learning Virtual conferences 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    O. Mäkinen and J. Naarmala. ”Defining Cyberethics” ICEB + eBRF 2006 November 28 - December 2 Tampere Hall - Tampere, Finland., in press.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    G. Deleuze. “Filosofiasta” (“Sur de philosophie”, Pourparlers, 1990). In “Gilles Deleuze: Haastatteluja”. Trans. by Anna Helle et. al. Helsinki: Tutkijaliitto, 2005. pp. 73-98.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Ibid, p. 74.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    G. Deleuze. ”Difference and Repetition”. Trans. by Paul Patton. London: Continuum, 2004, pp. 166-167.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    G. Aylesworth. “Postmodernism.’ In “Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’. Stanford University, 2005. Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. Baudrllard. “Simulacra and Simulation’. Trans. S. Glaser, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994. p. 6.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    G. Aylesworth, 2005.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    O. Mäkinen. “Moderni, toisto ja ironia. Søren Kierkegaardin estetiikan aspekteja ja Joseph Hellerin Catch-22”. Oulu: Oulun yliopisto, 2004. p. 208.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    S. Kierkegaard. ”Toisto” (”Gjentagelsen”). Tras. by O. Mäkinen. Jyväskylä: Atena, 2001. p. 33.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    O. Mäkinen. ”Yossarianin hyppy esteettisestä uskonnolliseen. Kierkegaard, Joseph Heller ja Catch-22.” Oulu, Oulun yliopisto, 1998. p. 35.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    S. Kierkegaard. ”Sygdommen til Døden: En christelig psychologisk Udvikling til Opbyggelse og Opvækkelse.” In Søren Kierkegaards Samlede Værker XI, pp. 129-272, Kjøbenhavn: Gyldendlske Boghandel, Nordisk Forlag, 1929 p. 176.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Kierkegaard. “Either-Or”. Ed. and trans. by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    I. Kant.“Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. by Norman Kemp Smith ; with a new introduction by Howard Caygill. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire : Palgrave Macmillan New York, 2003.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    D. Moran. ”Introduction to Phenomenology”. London and New York: Routledge, 2000. pp. 11-12.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    J. Baudrillard. Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2006. p. 7.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Ibid, pp. 12-14.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    L. Rauhala. “Hermeneuttisen tieteenfilosofian analyyseja ja sovelluksia’. Helsinki, Helsinki University Press, 2006. p. 126.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    O. Mäkinen and J. Naarmala. ”Defining Cyberethics” ICEB + eBRF 2006 November 28 - December 2 Tampere Hall - Tampere, Finland., in press.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    O. Mäkinen and T. Mäntymäki. ”Living interaction and flexible solutions in the changing world of academic studies”. Creating Knowledge, International conference at The Royal Library and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, August 16-18, 2006.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education:, Jan. 2000.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    O. Mäkinen and T. Mäntymäki, 2006.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education:, Jan. 2000.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Olli Mäkinen, Hanna Kuoppala and Katri Rintamäki. ”Informaation luonne ja plagiointi: empiirinen tutkimus opiskelijoiden käsityksestä tiedosta, sen käytöstä ja heidän suhtautumisestaan virtuaaliopetukseen”. (In ”Akateemisia opiskelutaitoja oppimassa. Opiskelijoiden kokemuksia verkkokurssilta ja tiedonhakutaitojen kehitys lähiopetuksessa”, Ed. Olli Mäkinen. pp. 59-118) Selvityksiä ja raportteja. Vaasa, Vaasan yliopisto, 2006.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
  25. [25]
    L. Introna. ”The (im)possibility of ethics in the information age”. In Information and Organization, 12, 71-84, 2002. p. 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • O. Mäkinen
    • 1
  1. 1.PhD, University of VaasaP.O. Box 700FI-65101

Personalised recommendations