CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 22Digital Media and PhilosophyCybernetics and Technology in SocietyCultural Studies and Postmodernism

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Virtual Worlds and Their Challenge to Philosophy: Understanding the “Intravirtual” and the “Extravirtual”

Søraker, Johnny Hartz·2012·Metaphilosophy
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2012.01755.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

TheWeb, in particular real‐time interactions in three‐dimensional virtual environments (virtual worlds), comes with a set of unique characteristics that leave our traditional frameworks inapplicable. The present article illustrates this by arguing that the notion of “technology relations,” as put forward by Ihde andVerbeek, becomes inapplicable when it comes to theInternet, and this inapplicability shows why these phenomena require new philosophical frameworks. Against this background, and more constructively, the article proposes a fundamental distinction between “intravirtual” and “extravirtual” consequences—a distinction that allows us to understand and conceptualize real‐time interactions online more accurately. By relating this distinction toSearle's notion of “condition of satisfaction,” the article also shows its implications for judging real‐time, online interactions in virtual worlds as irrational and/or immoral. The ultimate purpose is to illustrate how new philosophical concepts and frameworks can allow us to better account for the unique characteristics of theInternet.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2012.01755.x

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 13 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Moor Jim, 1985, Computers and Ethics, 266
  2. Søraker Johnny Hartz., 2010, Emerging Ethical Issues of Life in Virtual Worlds, 15
  3. 10.5325/j.ctv14gp4w7 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 22

Related

Metadata

Authors
Søraker, J. H.
Affiliations
University of Twente (NL)
Corresponding author
Søraker, Johnny Hartz
Venue
Metaphilosophy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-07
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
499-512
ISSN
  • 0026-1068 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9973
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-9973.2012.01755.x
OpenAlex
W2110028086
Cited by
22
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
5.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 15 d)
Locations
  • Metaphilosophy (publishedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (publishedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Digital Media and Philosophy
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Cultural Studies and Postmodernism
Keywords
virtual worlds, Ihde, John Searle, three-dimensional virtual environments, internet, philosophy of technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review