Information and design: book symposium on Luciano Floridi’s The Logic of Information

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review and discuss Luciano Floridi’s 2019 book The Logic of Information: A Theory of Philosophy as Conceptual Design, the latest instalment in his philosophy of information (PI) tetralogy, particularly with respect to its implications for library and information studies (LIS). Design/methodology/approach Nine scholars with research interests in philosophy and LIS read and responded to the book, raising critical and heuristic questions in the spirit of scholarly dialogue. Floridi responded to these questions. Findings Floridi’s PI, including this latest publication, is of interest to LIS scholars, and much insight can be gained by exploring this connection. It seems also that LIS has the potential to contribute to PI’s further development in some respects. Research limitations/implications Floridi’s PI work is technical philosophy for which many LIS scholars do not have the training or patience to engage with, yet doing so is rewarding. This suggests a role for translational work between philosophy and LIS. Originality/value The book symposium format, not yet seen in LIS, provides forum for sustained, multifaceted and generative dialogue around ideas.

Understanding Artificial Intelligence in Research Libraries – Extensive Literature Review

“…In the review, six authors express an investigation-oriented role for libraries (code L-4, 6/126 papers), highlighting the need to survey libraries' opinions on change (Ali et al, 2020), monitor the change (Cox et al, 2019a;Frederick, 2017;Lorang et al, 2020), or conduct library and information science research (Gorichanaz et al, 2020;Kushkowski et al, 2020). In contrast to these views, three authors forecast that AI will eventually replace librarians (code L-5, 3/126 papers).…”

“…When referring to intelligent technology, the authors use human-like expressions, such as "stakeholder," "intermediary expert," "intelligent agent," "assistant," "companion," and "research buddy," and indicate more independent than instrumental activities for these technologies (e.g., Dent, 2007;Gasparini et al, 2018;Iantovics et al, 2016;Kim, 2019b;Koehler, 2004;Riddick, 1990). Computer programs and algorithms may be considered autonomous managers and producers of information and even autonomous problem solvers (Bourg, 2017;Gorichanaz et al, 2020;Wang, 2011). By freeing librarians' time for other tasks, machines can independently tailor content to meet users' needs, locate connections in a large set of data, and facilitate users' interactions with library services (Kim, 2019a;Adams Becker et al, 2017).…”

“…Bypassing librarians 4 Ewing & Hauptman, 1995;Gorichanaz et al, 2020;Nolin, 2013) No role 47 (e.g., Stehno & Retti, 2003;Wetzler et al, 2009) RQ 3 Role of non-humans AI-1 Tool/system 51 (e.g., Alexander et al, 2019;Baba et al, 2016;Iqbal et al, 2020;Jadhav & Shenoy, 2020;Kanarkard et al, 2017;Rubin et al, 2010;Schoeb et al, 2020;Tsuji et al, 2014 Benedetti et al, 2020;Finnemann, 2014;Lorang et al, 2020;Muehlberger et al, 2019;Nolin, 2013;Sidorko, 2009) AI-6…”

“The dearest of our possessions”: Applying Floridi's information privacy concept in models of information behavior and information literacy

“…Floridi has developed a comprehensive philosophical approach to information in all its manifestations, including information ethics (Floridi, 2011(Floridi, , 2013(Floridi, , 2019. This includes a concept of ontological information privacy; see Floridi (2005Floridi ( , 2006Floridi ( , 2016Floridi ( , 2017 Furner (2010Furner ( , 2017, Brenner (2014), Van der Veer Martens (2017), Wu and Brenner (2017), Gorichanaz et al (2020), and Bawden and Robinson (2018. This amounts to what Floridi describes as a "radical reinterpretation [of privacy], one that takes into account the informational nature of ourselves, and of our interactions as inforgs" (Floridi, 2014, p. 119).…”

Still Minding the Gap? Reflecting on Transitions between Concepts of Information in Varied Domains

“…Floridi's PI has been particularly extensively analysed within the LIS discipline, and indeed proposed as a suitable theoretical foundation for that domain: for overviews, see [62,112], and for examples of individual contributions to the debate, see [104,[113][114][115][116]. This is the only example of one of the general theories from philosophy being adopted within, and potentially contributed to by, a discipline other than the one in which it was developed.…”