The Red Brick Times

"For most of human history, people have lived in small tribes where everything they did was known by everyone they knew," Dr. Malone said. "In some sense we're becoming a global village. Privacy may turn out to have become an anomaly."
Posted 4:41 AM by whatley (2) comments

       Comments:

[abstracted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy]
Privacy is the ability of an individual or group to seclude themselves or information about themselves and thereby reveal themselves selectively. The boundaries and content of what is considered private differ among cultures and individuals, but share basic common themes. Privacy is sometimes related to anonymity, the wish to remain unnoticed or unidentified in the public realm.

Privacy uses the theory of natural rights.There have been attempts to reframe privacy as a fundamental human right, whose social value is an essential component in the functioning of democratic societies.Priscilla Regan [Dr. Regan is a Professor in the Department of Public and International Affairs at George Mason University]... supports a social value of privacy with three dimensions: shared perceptions, public values, and collective components. Shared ideas about privacy allows freedom of conscience and diversity in thought. Public values guarantee democratic participation, including freedoms of speech and association, and limits government power. Collective elements describe privacy as collective good that cannot be divided.

[from http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&s=privacy&h=00&j=0#c]
Noun

* S: (n) privacy (the quality of being secluded from the presence or view of others)
* S: (n) privacy (the condition of being concealed or hidden)

Question: at what point does the right of individual privacy supercede the collective right to insure social cohesion through conformance to behavioral norms?

Is the substance of social organization and the exchange of protective rights undermined by extreme application of individual privacy? Do we, the collective, have an equal right to know when person(s) are behaving in ways outside the norm. Is that collective right limited only to those actions that can be legimately viewed as violating the 'natural rights' of others.

I worry when the standard is legal versus ethical. Law is the social construct that defines the least acceptable behavior and while much more easier to objectify it also lowers the standard of conduct.

# posted by  jeichenlaub : November 30, 2008 12:32 PM
 
The older I have become, the fewer fences of social normalcy I wish to publically jump. Although in the larger scheme of sociopathic venality and mendacity I probably have nothing to hide, my furtive, darting need for selective revelation springs from fear. The few little bits of my life that I can manipulate within the walls of my mind I want to keep clutched to my chest, hidden from the bottomless public maw of drooling hunger for private details about others. Reality TV stuns me to my toes by portraying the worst of human traits planted in a tropical hothouse of selfishness and greed. Even troops of gibbons have more dependable social structures. Not only am I anti-entertained, I cringe, I shudder, I flinch and feel nauseated by these strip shows of ugly obscenity more prurient than any mechanical or pandering celluloid procreative act. The animal rage on the faces of my fellow motorists when imaginary space is violated also scares me beyond normal limits, partly because I have felt it myself and have been ashamed afterward. What is our optimal density? How much space do we need before we turn and eat each other like rats on a pogrom? No doubt about it. The worse things get, the more suspicious, furtive eyes peer through the dark fog, seeking advantage and slights, real or imagined. Woe. Woe, for winter is apon us and its teeth are cold.

# posted by  Andy : December 01, 2008 9:25 AM
 
Post a Comment


---