CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Political Philosophy and EthicsInformation Society and Technology TrendsEthics and Social Impacts of AI

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Neo-Rawlsian Co-ordinates: Notes on A Theory of Justice for the Information Age

Open access
Duff, Alistair S·2006·The International Review of Information Ethics
DOI 10.29173/irie135
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The ideas of philosopher John Rawls should be appropriated for the information age. A literature review identifies previous contributions in fields such as communication and library and information science. The article postulates the following neo-Rawlsian propositions as co-ordinates for the development of a normative theory of the information society: that political philosophy should be incorporated into information society studies; that social and technological circumstances define the limits of progressive politics; that the right is prior to the good in social morality; that the nation state should remain in sharp focus, despite globalization; that liberty, the first principle of social justice, requires updating to deal with the growth of surveillance and other challenges; that social wellbeing is a function of equal opportunities plus limited inequalities of outcome, in information as well as material resources; and that political stability depends upon an overlapping consensus accommodating both religion and secularism. Although incomplete, such co-ordinates can help to guide policy-makers in the twenty-first century.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.29173/irie135

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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 16 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Duff, A. S.
Affiliations
Edinburgh Napier University (GB)
Corresponding author
Duff, Alistair S
Venue
The International Review of Information Ethics
Publisher
University of Alberta Libraries
Published
2006-12-01
Volume
6
Pages
17-22
ISSN
  • 1614-1687 (ISSN-L)
  • 2563-5638
DOI
10.29173/irie135
OpenAlex
W2560336312
Cited by
10
References
16
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The International Review of Information Ethics (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Napier Research Repository (Edinburgh Napier University) (publishedVersion)
Funders
Arts and Humanities Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Information Society and Technology Trends
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
John Rawls, theory of justice, information society, political philosophy, surveillance, freedom, equal opportunities, nation-state, globalization, overlapping consensus, religion and secularism, social justice, information ethics

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