I believe it is somewhat a case of the hammer becoming the
house. If you deal in information-as-concept frequently, it will
become the lens through which you view everything, even yourself
and others. I will use Dawkins as analogy: He is (I might say
'was' because he seems to have embarked on a new career a while
back) an evolutionary biologist with his particular brand of
neo-Darwinism. So, everything he writes and talks about will
come through this lens he sees through. This doesn't take away
from things we can learn when he goes cross-discpline. However,
it can lead him to some glossing over of important factors from
the disciplines he is analogizing TO the evolutionary biology
that he knows so well. [I don't care for the direction he's
taken in his 'new career' but I'm resisting negativity here as I
appreciated his earlier self] So, I could be wrong, but this is
what I think might be happening in the case of integrated
information theory: the hammer turned into a house: the tool
became "the thing itself": a danger for anybody who works in a
very specific field and looks at everything from that vantage
point. To a cook, everything is an ingredient: that sort of
thing.
