Methodological Issues

  • Massimo Durante
Part of the The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology book series (ELTE, volume 18)


The information revolution engendered by the evolution of digital information and communication technologies (ICTs) is a central issue that needs to be investigated and examined against the backdrop of a mature and comprehensive theory of information that has clearly formulated methodological premises rooted in the philosophical tradition. Only then can we gain a deeper understanding of our relationship with technology today. Luciano Floridi’s theory of information, which encompasses both a philosophy (The philosophy of information. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011a) and an ethics of information (Information ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013; see also Floridi 2008a, b), satisfies this inescapable methodological requirement. The method that Floridi develops (the method of levels of abstraction) can be applied to the entire range of issues with which his theory of information is concerned. This method is indeed very fruitful, since it avoids the pitfalls of the Scylla of subjectivism and the Charybdis of objectivism. In the present chapter and throughout this whole book, we will illustrate and make use of Floridi’s method while attempting, whenever possible, to lay bare the profound philosophical underpinnings of the subjects evoked in our analysis. In so doing, we hope that every thesis presented in this text is rooted in a thoughtful understanding of the history of philosophy.


  1. Bateson, G. 1973. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Frogmore, St. Albans: Paladin.Google Scholar
  2. Benkler, Y. 2006. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Ceruti, M. 2009. Il vincolo e la possibilità. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.Google Scholar
  4. Deleuze, G., and F. Guattari. 1994. What Is Philosophy? New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Durante, M. 2010. The Value of Information as Ontological Pluralism. Knowledge, Technology & Policy 23 (1): 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ———. 2011. Rethinking Human Identity in the Age of Autonomic Computing: The Philosophical Idea of the Trace. In Law, Human Agency and Autonomic Computing. The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Technology, ed. M. Hildebrandt and A. Rouvroy, 85–103. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Floridi, L. 2003. On the Intrinsic Value of Information Objects and the Infosphere. Ethics and Information Technology 4 (4): 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. ———. 2007. A Look into the Future Impact of ICT on Our Lives. The Information Society 23 (1): 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. ———. 2008a. Information Ethics, Its Nature and Scope. In Moral Philosophy and Information Technology, ed. J. van den Hoven and J. Weckert, 40–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2008b. Information Ethics: A Reappraisal. In Ess, C. (ed.). Luciano Floridi’s Philosophy of Information and Information Ethics: Critical Reflections and the State of the Art. Ethics and Information Technology, 10(2–3): 189–204.Google Scholar
  11. ———. 2008c. The Method of Levels of Abstraction. Minds and Machines 18 (3): 303–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ———. 2010. Information. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ———. 2011a. The Philosophy of Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ———. 2011b. A Defence of Constructionism: Philosophy as Conceptual Engineering. Metaphilosophy 42 (3): 282–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kallinikos, J. 2011. Governing Through Technology. Information Artefacts and Social Practice. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lessig, L. 2006. Code: And Other Laws of Cyberspace, Version 2.0. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  17. MacKay, D.M. 1969. Information, Mechanism and Meaning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Moor, J.H. 1985. What Is Computer Ethics? Metaphilosophy 16 (4): 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Prigogine, I., and I. Stengers 1981. Vincolo, Enciclopedia Einaudi, Einaudi, Torino, vol. 14, 1064–1080.Google Scholar
  20. Taylor, M. 2001. The Moment of Complexity: Emerging Network Culture. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Wellman, B., et al. 2003. The Social Affordance of the Internet for Networked Individualism. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 8 (3.), available online.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Massimo Durante
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of LawUniversity of TurinTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations