Security Networks and Human Autonomy: A Philosophical Investigation

  • David Lundie


Data transactions in complex information networks have their own philosophical and mathematical logics. This chapter introduces the reader to key philosophical debates about the nature and effect of information technologies, and seeks to apply these to the philosophy of information. Drawing on personalist philosophy, the chapter redirects attention to questions of moral agency as they relate to security and intelligence work, and questions whether overreliance on data may fail to account for important aspects of human experience and action.


Security networks Human autonomy Philosophy of information Information technologies Surveillance Dividuation Personalistic philosophy Values in design 


  1. Adams, F. (2004). Knowledge. In Floridi, L. (ed.) The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information. Oxford: Blackwell. 228–236.Google Scholar
  2. Alder, G. S. (1998). Ethical issues in electronic performance monitoring: A consideration of deontological and teleological perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 729–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen, J. (2000). Examined lives: Informational privacy and the subject as object. Stanford Law Review, 53(3), 1373–1438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. de La Mettrie, J. O. (1996). Machine man and other writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the societies of control. October, 59, 3–7.Google Scholar
  6. Dretske, F. I. (1981). Knowledge and the flow of information. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Ess, C. (2009). Floridi’s philosophy of information and information ethics: Current perspectives, future directions. Information Society, 25(3), 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Floridi, L. (2004). Information. In L. Floridi (Ed.), The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of computing and information. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Floridi, L. (2005). Consciousness, agents and the knowledge game. Minds and Machines, 15(3), 415–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Friedman, B., & Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Bias in computer systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 14(3), 330–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heidegger, M. (1978). Basic writings: Revised and expanded edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Knobel, C., & Bowker, G. C. (2011). Computing ethics values in design. Communications of the ACM, 54(7), 26–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Loch, K. D., & Conger, S. (1996). Evaluating ethical decision making and computer use. Communications of the ACM, 39, 74–83.Google Scholar
  14. Lundie, D. (2015). The givenness of the human learning experience and its incompatibility with information analytics. Educational Philosophy and Theory. doi: 10.1080/00131857.2015.1052357.Google Scholar
  15. Lundie, D. (2016). Authority, autonomy and automation: The irreducibility of pedagogy to information transactions. In Studies in philosophy and education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Plato (n.d.). Phaedrus. In The works of Plato (trans: Jowett, B.). New York: Tudor Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  17. Reich, R. (1992). The work of nations: Preparing ourselves for 21st century capitalism. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  18. Schrader, D. & Lundie, D. (2012). The value of privacy and private information sharing in online communications. Association of Moral Education Annual Conference, San Antonio, TX, November 2012.Google Scholar
  19. Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  20. Solove, D. (2006). A taxonomy of privacy. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154(3), 477–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Spencer, G. (1996). Microcybernetics as the meta-technology of pure control. In Z. Sardar & J. R. Ravetz (Eds.), Cyberfutures: Culture and politics on the information superhighway (pp. 61–76). London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  22. Tse, J., Schrader, D., Ghosh, D., Liao, T., & Lundie, D. (2015). A bibliometric analysis of privacy and ethics in IEEE Security and Privacy. Ethics and Information Technology, 17(2), 153–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Turing, A. (1949). Intelligent machinery, s.l., s.n.Google Scholar
  24. Van den Hoven, M. J. (1997). Privacy and the varieties of moral wrong-doing in the information age. Computers and Society, 27(2), 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Weinberger, D. (2012). Too big to know: Rethinking knowledge now that the facts aren’t the facts, experts are everywhere, and the smartest person in the room is the room. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Wheeler, J. (1990). Information, physics, quantum: The search for links. In W. Zureck (Ed.), Complexity, entropy and the physics of information. Redwood City, CA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  27. Wicker, S. B., & Schrader, D. E. (2010). Privacy aware design principles for information networks. Proceedings of the IEEE, 99(2), 330–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  29. Zahavi, D. (2005). Subjectivity and selfhood: Investigating the first-person perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  30. Zahavi, D., & Parnas, J. (1998). Phenomenal consciousness and self-awareness: A phenomenological critique of representational theory. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 5(5), 687–705.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Lundie
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Education StudiesLiverpool Hope UniversityLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations