Levellism and the method of abstraction

IEG Research Report (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX


The use of "levels of abstraction" in philosophical analysis (levellism) has recently come under attack. In this paper, we argue that a refined version of epistemological levellism should be retained as a fundamental method, which we call the method of abstraction. After a brief introduction, in section two we make clear the nature and applicability of the (epistemological) method of levels of abstraction. In section three, we show the fruitfulness of the new method by applying it to five case studies: the concept of agenthood, the Turing test, the definition of emergence, quantum observation and decidable observation. In section four, we further characterise and support the method by distinguishing it from three other forms of "levellism": (i) levels of organisation; (ii) levels of explanation and (iii) conceptual schemes. In this context, we also briefly address the problems of relativism and antirealism. In the conclusion, we indicate some of the work that lies ahead, two potential limitations of the method and some results that have already been obtained by applying the method to some long-standing philosophical problems.



External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Method of Levels of Abstraction.Luciano Floridi - 2008 - Minds and Machines 18 (3):303–329.
Levels of Abstraction, Emergentism and Artificial Life.Emanuele Ratti - 2014 - Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence:1-12.
Un-Making Artificial Moral Agents.Deborah G. Johnson & Keith W. Miller - 2008 - Ethics and Information Technology 10 (2-3):123-133.
Abstraction Relations Need Not Be Reflexive.Jonathan Payne - 2013 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 2 (2):137-147.
The Troubled History of Abstraction.Ignacio Angelelli - 2005 - History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 8.
Marxian “Abstraction” and Contemporary Philosophy of Science.Juraj Halas - 2018 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 55 (3):122-136.
Science and Abstraction.L. J. Russell - 1930 - Humana Mente 5 (17):84-93.
Term Models for Abstraction Principles.Leon Horsten & Øystein Linnebo - 2016 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 45 (1):1-23.
Marx et les abstractions.André Tosel - 2002 - Archives de Philosophie 2 (2):311-334.


Added to PP

76 (#157,408)

6 months
25 (#42,481)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Luciano Floridi
Oxford University

Citations of this work

Information Ethics, its Nature and Scope.Luciano Floridi - 2006 - Acm Sigcas Computers and Society 36 (2):21-36.
Trends in the Philosophy of Information.Luciano Floridi - 2008 - In Pieter Adriaans & Johan van Bentham (eds.), Philosophy of Information. Amsterdam, Netherlands: pp. 113–131.
Global Information Ethics: The Importance of Being Environmentally Earnest.Luciano Floridi - 2007 - International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI) 3 (3):1-11.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Vision.David Marr - 1982 - W. H. Freeman.
What is It Like to Be a Bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (October):435-50.
Unified Theories of Cognition.Allen Newell - 1990 - Harvard University Press.

View all 38 references / Add more references