Privacy readings

 Please read these two legal theory papers about privacy:

 Allen, "The Virtuous Spy"

Warren and Brandeis, "The Right to Privacy" excerpts

We are going to work together to understand these two articles.  In a comment on this post, "claim" one of the following questions, numbered 1-12.  Choose wisely!

1. Warren and Brandeis claim that the individual has a right "to be let alone."  What does this mean?  Do you agree?  Defend your answer.

2. In Warren and Brandeis, the authors observe, "Instantaneous photographs and newspaper enterprise have invaded the sacred precincts of private and domestic life; and numerous mechanical devices threaten to make good the prediction that "what is whispered in the closet shall be proclaimed from the house-tops”".  They were living in a time that, like now, was filled with technological innovation.  Which came first, do you think--the progressive interest in defining a right to privacy (and the desire, for some, to invade that privacy), or the technological changes that made such considerations necessary?  Why?

3. Warren and Brandeis introduce the example of publishing a private letter.  Why do they introduce this example?  How does it help them move along their arguments about the right to privacy?  Do you agree with their claim based on this example?  Why?

4. Warren and Brandeis claim, "There are others who, in varying degrees, have renounced the right to live their lives screened from public observation."  Who are these others?  Why do Warren and Brandeis think they have renounced their rights to privacy to some degree?  Do you agree that some people have renounced their right to privacy?  Who are they?  Why?

5. Are truth and lack of malice adequate defenses for invading someone's privacy, according to Warren and Brandeis?  What is their reasoning?  Do you agree with their position?  Why or why not?

6. Allen says that McCloskey defended parental spying on children.  What circumstances did Allen describe in her section on parental spying on children?  Did she regard these circumstances as legitimate grounds for spying on children?  Do you agree with Allen that the circumstances described are legitimate grounds for spying on children? 

7. McCloskey (as quoted by Allen) says that "lawbreakers have no genuine right to privacy."  How would he defend the idea that lawbreakers have no genuine right to privacy?  Do lawbreakers forfeit other rights? Do you agree with McCloskey that lawbreakers have no genuine right to privacy?  Why or why not?  Defend your answer.

8. Allen disagrees with McCloskey and says that "wrongdoers do have some legitimate expectations of privacy."  What rights to privacy do wrongdoers have, in Allen's estimation? She qualifies this in an important way with respect to sexual wrongdoing--what is this qualification, and what does this mean?  Do you agree with Allen's ideas about wrongdoers' rights to privacy?  Why?

9. Allen introduces the case of Glenn Michael.  What did Glenn Michael do?  Allen says he "broke the rules of the game".  Do you agree?  Defend your answer.

10. McCloskey (as depicted by Allen) has a particular argument about lovers' entitlement to spy on one another.  What is it? Allen has a different argument--what is her argument?  Do you agree with either of them, or, do you have a different opinion, and if so, what is it?  Defend your opinion.

11. Allen claims that "like parents and spouses, corporations may in principle be justified in spying to meet" a certain kind of responsibilities.  What kind of responsibilities is she referring to?  What are the boundaries she draws around this responsibility?  Do you agree with Allen's reasoning?  Why or why not?

12. Allen sets up a case where national security duels with personal privacy.  Where does she think the line should be drawn when it comes to spying for the sake of national security?  Arguably, she doesn't offer much reasoning to defend her claim.  Help her out.  What reasons could you come up with to defend Allen's idea about the right way to balance national security and personal privacy?  Do you agree?  Why or why not?



Post your answer to your question by NOON ON MONDAY as an original post on the blog.  At the top of your post, make sure you include the question.  When you refer to the articles in paraphrases or quotes, cite them by author and page number.  

It's important to not be late on this, as your posts will serve as a study guide for your classmates.  The idea is that each of you will understand all the points in the articles reasonably well, and understand one idea REALLY well, so that when we discuss this next Tuesday, everybody will have an informed opinion about something, and if we put those ideas together we can all understand the entire set of readings a little better. 

Why are we doing this?  Understanding these theoretical works will give us a foundation and springboard to apply these ideas to the cases we encounter today that address problems of privacy.