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.
Before I get into answering the
question, it seems like this piece was way before its time. I’m not sure how
the newspapers (media in general) were in the late 1800s when this was written,
but this feels like it certainly could have been written very recently,
especially in this age of Facebook, Twitter, TMZ, camera phones, and all other
types of media.
The authors claiming that the
individual has a right “to be let alone” means that people have a right to keep
their private lives private and they shouldn’t be bothered by outsiders. They
are saying a person should be able to live his or her life on his or her own
terms, as long as it is legally acceptable and not a matter of public or
general interest (page 3). “Later, there came a recognition of man's spiritual
nature, of his feelings and his intellect. Gradually the scope of these legal
rights broadened; and now the right to life has come to mean the right to enjoy
life.” (Warren, Brandeis, Page 1)
I do agree with the authors on this
issue. In particular, this section of the above quote stands out to me, “the
right to life has come to mean the right to enjoy life.” That section of the
quote reminds me of what our country was founded on – The Declaration of
Independence. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are
created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence)
Our country’s founding document essentially says we have “the right to enjoy
life,” and the right “to be let alone,” as Warren and Brandeis state.
What we do behind closed doors, in
the privacy of our own home, or even in public as long as we are not harming
others or causing a public disturbance should be of no concern to anyone else. The
authors also discuss the right of a person’s writings and that if a person
wishes for something he or she has written to remain private, then it should
remain private. “The design of the law must be to protect those persons with
whose affairs the community has no legitimate concern, from being dragged into
an undesirable and undesired publicity and to protect all persons, whatsoever;
their position or station, from having matters which they may properly prefer
to keep private, made public against their will.” (Warren, Brandeis, Page 3)
In society today, many athletes,
celebrities, and political figures have photos and/or videos taken of them, and
a lot of people think it is our right as the public to know everything we can
about certain people. I try to not follow that type of stuff. I’m a big sports
fan. I try to keep my like or dislike of a player to what happens on the field
or court because I don’t believe I have a right to know what these people do in
their private lives. If a person, an athlete, celebrity, political figure, or
otherwise, chooses to share information (on Facebook, Twitter, etc.), that is
their business and any fallout or criticism that stems from that is on them. With
The Declaration of Independence saying we have the right to “Life, Liberty and
the pursuit of Happiness,” that tells me we have the right “to be let alone,”
as well.
Agent Orange
Agent Orange, nice work here! I have two lines of questioning.
ReplyDelete1) You based your argument partly on connecting the "right to be let alone" with the "right to enjoy life" with the "right" to the "pursuit of happiness." Is enjoyment of life the same thing as pursuit of happiness? Musing on this, it's interesting that your point of view diverges from the authors' here: Warren and Brandeis are connecting the "right to enjoy life" with the "right to life", but you're connecting it to the right to the pursuit of happiness. Thinking about writing, it might have been advantageous to you if you pointed out how your ideas diverge from Warren and Brandeis.
1b) Let's look at the other half of that connection. You connected the "right to be let alone" with the "right to enjoy life". Warren and Brandeis certainly want to make that connection. Do you buy it?
2) Following on the above, does the Declaration of Independence codify rights that already exist naturally, or does it confer on the people of the United States those rights?
2b) Another way to think about it: is this right a natural right codified in law, or a legal right assigned by law? Do non-Americans have the right to be let alone (and rights to life and the enjoyment of life), even if their constitutional documents/laws don't say so?