首页> 外文学位 >A response to some philosophical questions about privacy.
【24h】

A response to some philosophical questions about privacy.

机译:对有关隐私的一些哲学问题的回应。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Privacy is a puzzling concept. It is often sought in the realm of law and everyday life. Yet certain philosophers and jurists contend that the concept should be abandoned. The philosophers argue that privacy is neither conceptually nor morally distinct from other interests; the jurists point to the apparently disparate interests involved in privacy law. In my dissertation, I present an intimacy and control-based account of privacy which escapes these criticisms.;This dissertation contains both a critical and constructive section. In the critical section, I survey the chaos of privacy in the legal and philosophical literature. I draw out three questions from the literature: is privacy a conceptually and morally distinct concept? How should privacy be defined? What value should be accorded to privacy? The constructive chapters of my dissertation answer these questions. I start by arguing that skepticism about privacy fails: the meaning and value of privacy cannot be reduced to the meaning and value of non-privacy interests. I then argue that privacy provides the agent with control over intimate decisions, including an agent's decisions about intimate access to herself, the dissemination of intimate information, and her own intimate actions. This account of privacy gives rise to the need to explain intimacy. I argue that intimacy is a product of the agent's motivation. To claim that something is intimate is to claim that it draws its meaning and value for the agent from her love, liking and/or care. This account of intimacy is incorporated into my definition of privacy: privacy is the state of possessing control over decisions concerning matters which draw their meaning and value from one's love, liking and care. Finally, I discuss privacy's value. I argue that the source of privacy's positive value is neither its promotion of relationships, nor respect for persons as rational choosers. Rather, privacy embodies our respect for persons as emotional beings. To respect others in this fashion, we must acknowledge their autonomous capacity for love, liking and care. In short, we must accord them privacy.
机译:隐私是一个令人困惑的概念。它经常在法律和日常生活领域中寻求。但是,某些哲学家和法学家认为应该放弃这个概念。哲学家认为,隐私既在概念上也不在道德上与其他利益不同。法学家指出,隐私法所涉及的利益显然不同。在我的论文中,我提出了一种基于私密性和控制性的隐私说明,从而避免了这些批评。本论文包含一个关键性和建设性的部分。在关键部分,我调查了法律和哲学文献中隐私的混乱情况。我从文献中提出了三个问题:隐私是在概念上和道德上是不同的概念吗?应该如何定义隐私?隐私应赋予什么价值?本文的建设性章节回答了这些问题。首先,我对隐私权的怀疑失败了:隐私权的意义和价值不能降低为非隐私利益的意义和价值。然后我争辩说,隐私使代理人可以控制亲密的决定,包括代理人关于亲密访问自己,传播亲密信息以及她自己的亲密行为的决定。这种隐私说明导致需要解释亲密关系。我认为亲密关系是代理人动机的产物。宣称某件事情是亲密的,就是声称它从代理人的爱,喜好和/或关怀中汲取了它对代理人的意义和价值。这种亲密关系被并入我对隐私的定义中:隐私是一种控制决定权的状态,该决定权的决定源于一个人的爱,喜和关怀。最后,我讨论了隐私的价值。我认为,隐私的积极价值之源既不是促进关系,也不是尊重作为理性选择者的人。相反,隐私体现了我们对人作为情感存在的尊重。为了以这种方式尊重他人,我们必须承认他们对爱情,喜好和关怀的自主能力。简而言之,我们必须赋予他们隐私权。

著录项

  • 作者

    Inness, Julie Carolyn.;

  • 作者单位

    Stanford University.;

  • 授予单位 Stanford University.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1989
  • 页码 197 p.
  • 总页数 197
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 哲学理论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号