Search

Floridi's chapter on relevant information bridges the analysis of 'being informed' with the analysis of knowledge as 'relevant information that is accounted for' by analysing subjective or epistemic relevance in terms of the questions that an agent might ask in certain circumstances. In this paper, I scrutinise this analysis, identify a number of problems with it, and finally propose an improvement. By way of epilogue, I offer some more general remarks on the relation between (bounded) rationality, the need to ask the right questions, and the ability to ask the right questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]