Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23

Thread: Is privacy neccesary for freedom?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,778
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    It has been said a prerequisite of living in a free society is acceptance of the fact that there are always going to be criminal acts occurring due to those freedoms being exploited. Once those freedoms are altered in response to try and prevent such acts from being possible the society you hold so dear is no longer free.
    Very interesting point. True Freedom must include freedom to abuse one's freedom. How would this change if the world continues to move towards a totally open information environment, where, not only does law enforcement have access to people's private information, but everyone else, including those with criminal tendencies, and including you, on the whereabouts of the one's that are accessing your info. i'm talking about privacy not existing at all, except probably the thoughts you havent expresssed. how would this limit one's freedom?
    when man tried to understand nature, theism was born
    when man tried to understand God, atheism was born

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by unkerpaulie View Post
    Very interesting point. True Freedom must include freedom to abuse one's freedom. How would this change if the world continues to move towards a totally open information environment, where, not only does law enforcement have access to people's private information, but everyone else, including those with criminal tendencies, and including you, on the whereabouts of the one's that are accessing your info. i'm talking about privacy not existing at all, except probably the thoughts you havent expresssed. how would this limit one's freedom?
    Being unable to express a thought because of lack of privacy is a restriction on freedom.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,778
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    Being unable to express a thought because of lack of privacy is a restriction on freedom.
    Are you unable to express your thoughts? No. Does a lack of privacy prevent you from expressing a thought? No
    when man tried to understand nature, theism was born
    when man tried to understand God, atheism was born

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by unkerpaulie View Post
    Are you unable to express your thoughts? No. Does a lack of privacy prevent you from expressing a thought? No
    You would be unable to express desire for a friends wife.
    You would be unable to express a desire to leave your job.
    You would not be able to express a desire that compromised yourself and therefore could not act clandestinely.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,778
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    You would be unable to express desire for a friends wife.
    You would be unable to express a desire to leave your job.
    You would not be able to express a desire that compromised yourself and therefore could not act clandestinely.
    Granted you would be unable to act clandestinely, just as everybody else. But it doesn't take away your liberty to act. You'd still be able to do all the things you say you'd be unable to do.

    The main difference in an open access scenario is that we are likely going to be more acutely conscious of the consequences of our actions. Rather than assuming the possibility of escaping unscathed after making a decision that could have potentially negative consequences, we must accept the fact that hiding is not an option, and either man up and make the decision regardless, or let fear of repercussion keep us in line with what ever social norms rule the period. Either courage becomes second nature, or cowardice completely paralyzes you. However, the freedom to act still remains.
    when man tried to understand nature, theism was born
    when man tried to understand God, atheism was born

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by unkerpaulie View Post
    Granted you would be unable to act clandestinely, just as everybody else. But it doesn't take away your liberty to act. You'd still be able to do all the things you say you'd be unable to do.

    The main difference in an open access scenario is that we are likely going to be more acutely conscious of the consequences of our actions. Rather than assuming the possibility of escaping unscathed after making a decision that could have potentially negative consequences, we must accept the fact that hiding is not an option, and either man up and make the decision regardless, or let fear of repercussion keep us in line with what ever social norms rule the period. Either courage becomes second nature, or cowardice completely paralyzes you. However, the freedom to act still remains.
    Dont confuse acting clandestinely with cowardice.
    Some acts need to be done clandestinely to be done at all.
    Take away the secrecy and you take away or compromise the possibilty of success, therefore the lack of privacy will compromise the freedom to act.
    Also according to you, lack of privacy takes away the freedom to act cowardly...so you proved my point.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,778
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    Dont confuse acting clandestinely with cowardice.
    Some acts need to be done clandestinely to be done at all.
    Take away the secrecy and you take away or compromise the possibilty of success, therefore the lack of privacy will compromise the freedom to act.
    Also according to you, lack of privacy takes away the freedom to act cowardly...so you proved my point.
    Making a particular strategy obsolete or ineffective does not remove the freedom to use that strategy. There are many things that once were possible to succeed at that no longer work for the simple reason that times have changed. The probability of success is not what affects freedom, only the ability to exercise one's will. Nothing is stopping you from attempting to do something that will not work.

    As for cowardice, the act of not acting is a choice that the coward can make, as is acting under the belief that he is being clandestine, which is how all clandestine operations act all the time anyway.

    Can you give me an example of an act that is only possible to do in privacy?
    when man tried to understand nature, theism was born
    when man tried to understand God, atheism was born

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by unkerpaulie View Post
    Making a particular strategy obsolete or ineffective does not remove the freedom to use that strategy. There are many things that once were possible to succeed at that no longer work for the simple reason that times have changed. The probability of success is not what affects freedom, only the ability to exercise one's will. Nothing is stopping you from attempting to do something that will not work.

    As for cowardice, the act of not acting is a choice that the coward can make, as is acting under the belief that he is being clandestine, which is how all clandestine operations act all the time anyway.

    Can you give me an example of an act that is only possible to do in privacy?
    Well a passage blocked with engineering bricks does effect the freedom to pass through it.
    A wall of flame and the risk of getting burned alive does not effect the freedom to pass through it...according to you anyway.
    If you define freedom as the choice to to make impossible or near impossible tasks then making a task impossible or near impossible will have no effect on your definition.
    I think that making a task more difficult directly effects the freedom to do it.
    Unless your are insane or are unaware of the difficulty then one must consider it when making the choice to do it.


    If one wanted to change your job without your present employer knowing that you have approached another employer then your present employer should not know of either your desire to leave or your attempt to find other employment.
    You have to act clandestinely for others not to know what you are doing

    There are many reasons why it is important that your present employer should be unaware of your intentions...I dont care to list them.
    The fact that your employer did know of your intention could compromise both the success of getting the job and your position at your present company if you fail to get that job.
    To say that this would not affect your freedom to act is like saying that pain does not affect our freedom to hurt ourselves

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •