For my final project, I’d like to
discuss similarities and differences between Edward Snowden’s release of NSA
information and Socrates philosophical views. Their persistent questioning of authority and public figures led
one to death, the other to flee persecution. One considered fleeing to be
contrary to his moral principle; the other believes fleeing is necessary to
safeguard civil liberties.
Snowden is an interesting philosophical topic as what he did spans across a range of moral arguments and philosophers, but ultimately what he did follows the philosophy of Judas Iscariot in which a profound betrayal was justified as inevitable destiny.
ReplyDeleteComparing Judas with Snowden seems to be a bit of a stretch. I don't recall Jesus spying on his countryman. In a free society it is critical that citizens know what their government is doing to a degree. If the government is breaking the same laws that are supposed to protect its' citizens then the members of that society have a right to know. Innocent people that are not breaking the law do now want to be spied on. I believe in the fourth amendment. If the government wants to spy on someone then they should have probable cause to get a warrant. If you saw the movie Casino it was ironic that the mobster that was being surveilled had better equipment than the FBI.
ReplyDeleteThe moral analysis contained in Snowden's narrative suggests at least two ethical concerns. The first is an obligation to prevent public harm, including invasion of privacy and a loss of trust in one's government. The second ethical concern is a responsibility to set right the harm from NSA's practices because he, like all other members of that organization, was complicit in its actions, although he did not make intelligence policy and not everyone agrees that what the NSA was doing was evil. But it is this sense of moral responsibility that characterizes many good-faith whistleblowers, rarely rewarded but very difficult to extinguish. We seem unable to learn to acknowledge their virtues.
ReplyDeletehttp://ethics.harvard.edu/blog/snowden-and-institutional-corruption-what-have-we-learned
It will take long long time to make a trustworthy, good working relation and that can be damaged overnight with some "immature" act or behavior. Snowden's case can be a example as to discuss whether his act helped this great nation or did some serious damage?
ReplyDeleteWho is say that Snowden wasn't trust maybe he just got tired being manipulated and decided that enough is enough. Heroic and crowd-ism can be a state of mind. Its what you decide to do with what you find out with the information in the and so what cause everyone is going to have an opinion. NSA can use their surveillance to go any direction they see fit just as the news who reported the story on this case just depends who side your on
ReplyDeleteI dont think that Snowden's thought process can be understood. We will never know what he was thinking when he went on with this act. He could have done this for the sake of letting the nation know about whats going on, or out of spite for the government. All we can do is analyze what he did and try to come up with a conclusion and see what the consequences were of his actions.
ReplyDeleteI dont think that Snowden's thought process can be understood. We will never know what he was thinking when he went on with this act. He could have done this for the sake of letting the nation know about whats going on, or out of spite for the government. All we can do is analyze what he did and try to come up with a conclusion and see what the consequences were of his actions.
ReplyDelete