So, I was thinking about privacy recently and what it means - why is it important or, at least, why do we deem it
to be important? Why do people often become upset at perceived
violations of privacy? Is there a difference in real world privacy as
opposed to virtual privacy?
Why do we value privacy? Though it is
sufficient in practice, from a philosophical point of view I don't
think it is enough to reply "I don't want you looking in my
pocketbook". Nothing in that statement gives any indication of what it
is about privacy that makes it worth protecting. Instead, it is a
statement of desire, expressing a wish that X not do Y. Maybe asking
why assumes too much. Perhaps I should ask myself if privacy even has
value in and of itself. As a starting position, I will assert that
"privacy" is an empty term that only acquires bite when contextualized
- i.e. when the term is applied to something. So, then, to what does
privacy apply that I should make a value judgment?
I started to
think of all the things to which concerns about privacy could apply
(thoughts in ones head, using the toilet, whispering to someone in
public, the contents of a bag, etc.) and tried to think of some simple
way to distinguish from what is a rather wide range of concerns.
Something I came up with (though I am sure it is not original) is
distinguishing internal from external privacy concerns. The reason for
distinguishing between the two is to asset that a moral right to
privacy is not univeral and that it only applies to certain concerns -
here, internal ones. I wanted to distinguish internal versus external
as "not involving/dependent on interaction with entities beyond the
self" versus "involving/dependent on interaction with entities beyond
the self". What is internal? Based on the foregoing, perhaps only your
thoughts and (to the extent internalized) feelings. So perhaps there is
only an abolute moral right to privacy with respect to internal
processes - i.e. privacy concerning such matters is to be assumed.
Everything else, the external, is not subjectt privacy rights unless
justified. So, simply:
internal --> one has to justify why privacy rights do not exist
external --> one has to justify why privacy rights do exist
As
mind-reading machines to do not exist, concerns about the internal fall
away. So where does that leave us? In the rather unappealing position
of saying that one has no right to privacy unless such right is
justified. Though I am sure that a whole lotta people would disagree
with me, I do not necessarily see this as an issue so long as we also
understand why privacy rights might be assetted. Asserting a right to
privacy over something is essentially denying another person access to
knowledge - knowledge of what is in your bag, knowledge of what you
wrote in that email, knowledge of what drugs you injest to take the
edge off.
Why deny a person access to certain knowlege? Here,
I can't say "Because they don't have a right to it" as I have already
stated that there is no pre-existing right to deny access to the
knowledge. As the baseline accepts universal access, the point is that
they DO have a right to such knowledge. The trick is to find a reason
to justify stating that the right to deny access to the information
(i.e. the right to privacy) trumps another's right to access that
information.
I think one reason is power - access to certain
pieces of knowledge increase the risk or potential that another
will/can exercise power over another. The more people know, the more
powerful they are - this is one reason why "democracies" give so much
attention to of open government and governmental disclosure. However,
increased power is not necessarily beneficial as not all entities have
equal ability to exploit knowledge. Certain individuals or groups of
individuals are better placed to make use of knowledge to the detriment
of those to whom the particular knowledge applies.
So that is my thought - privacy is a defensive tactic against the abuse of power.
This
may seem an odd way to think about it but, on reflection, I realized
that I think like this anyway. I am a firm believer in the free flow of
information and so, rather than ask myself "Why should I disclose this
information?", tend to say "Why should I prevent others from knowing
this information?" For instance, I could
not find any material reason to justify me preventing others from
knowing the contents of my WoW character's bags and bank account. However, I
refrain from posting my bank account details online together with a file
containing a valid electronic signature as I judge that the potential for someone using such
information in a manner that negatively affects me vastly outweighs
anyones elses "right" to know such information.
This still bears thinking about.
