DIGITAL ETHICS OF RESPONSIBILITY IN THE WORKS OF L. FLORIDI
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26565/2226-0994-2025-72-11Keywords:
digital ethics, infosphere, responsibility, artificial intelligence, sociotechnical pragmatism, privacyAbstract
The article analyzes the transformation of the concept of responsibility in the digital age, particularly in the context of Luciano Floridi’s information ethics. Responsibility is examined as a key ethical category undergoing a profound shift under the influence of digital technologies. The authors emphasize that, in the digital era, responsibility should be understood not only as an individual moral choice but also as a collective obligation. Special attention is paid to the changing nature of ethical action in virtualized interactions, where classical notions of free will and moral autonomy are being revised. A central focus of the article is the concept of the “infosphere” – a global informational environment encompassing both digital and biosocial systems. Within this environment, responsibility emerges as a distributed and structural ethical function, shaped by a network of interactions between users, algorithms, and institutions.
The article addresses key challenges related to the development of artificial intelligence, particularly the issue of the “responsibility gap” and the social risks associated with algorithmic decision-making. It explores the foundations of sociotechnical pragmatism as an alternative to both utopianism and skepticism in evaluating digital technologies. A critical review is conducted of the AI4People initiative, which seeks to formulate universal ethical principles for a digital society. The analysis highlights five core principles of digital ethics: beneficence, autonomy, justice, explicability, and non-maleficence.
The study also examines the ethical implications of immersive digital environments (XR), which introduce new sensory and embodied dimensions of interaction. The article demonstrates that an ethical approach to digital reality must be interdisciplinary, reflexive, and oriented toward institutional responsibility. In this context, responsibility is interpreted as a multidimensional obligation encompassing technological, social, and normative aspects of interaction in a digitized world.
References
Jonas, H. (2001). Pryntsyp vidpovidalʹnosti: U poshukakh etyky dlia tekhnolohichnoi tsyvilizatsii [The principle of responsibility: In search of an ethics for the technological civilization] . Kyiv: Libra. (Original work published 1979). (In Ukrainian).
Instytut filosofii im. H. S. Skovorody NAN Ukrainy. (2002). Filosofsʹkyi entsyklopedychnyi slovnyk [Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary]. Kyiv: Abrys. (In Ukrainian).
Floridi, L. (1999). Information ethics: On the philosophical foundation of computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 1(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010018611096
Floridi, L. (2011). The philosophy of information. Oxford University Press.
Floridi, L. (2013). The ethics of information. Oxford University Press.
Floridi, L. (2014). The fourth revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford University Press.
Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., & Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People – An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28, 689–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5
Hine, E., Rezende, I. N., Roberts, H., Wong, D., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2024). Safety and privacy in immersive extended reality: An analysis and policy recommendations. Digital Society, 3(33). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44206-024-00114-1
Kelly, J. W., Keshavarz, B., & Palmisano, S. (2023). Cybersickness and gender: A meta-analytic review. Virtual Reality, 27, 315–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-022-00742-y
Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press.
Rössler, B. (2005). The value of privacy. Polity Press.
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559
Watson, D., Mökander, J., & Floridi, L. (2024). Competing narratives in AI ethics: A defense of sociotechnical pragmatism. AI & Society. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02128-2
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication of this work under the terms of a license Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
3.gif){kind=logo}
