The informational nature of being

What is the ultimate nature of reality?

In an article just published in Synthese, I argue in favour of an informational ontology. With a slogan: "To be is to be information".

Well,, it's a bit more complicated than that, so, if you are curious, you can read the preprint online.

And here is the abstract:

This is the revised version of an invited keynote lecture delivered at the 1st Australian Computing and Philosophy Conference (CAP@AU; the Australian National University in Canberra, 31 October – 2 November, 2003).

The paper is divided into two parts.

The first part defends an informational approach to structural realism. It does so in three steps.

1. First, it is shown that, within the debate about structural realism (SR), epistemic (ESR) and ontic (OSR) structural realism are reconcilable. It follows that a version of OSR is defensible from a structuralist-friendly position.
   
2. Second, it is argued that a version of OSR is also plausible, because not all relata (structured entities) are logically prior to relations (structures).
   
3. Third, it is shown that a version of OSR is also applicable to both sub-observable (unobservable and instrumentally-only observable) and observable entities, by developing its ontology of structural objects in terms of informational objects.

The outcome is informational structural realism, a version of OSR supporting the ontological commitment to a view of the world as the totality of informational objects dynamically interacting with each other.

The paper has been discussed by several colleagues and, in the second half, ten objections that have been moved to the proposal are answered in order to clarify it further.