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.