Student’s Name
Instructor’s Name
Course Title
Date
Privacy vs. Security
Digital technology has revolutionized every sector of society, when it comes to marketing, education, and communications, among others. However, this technology is not without its detriments. For example, digital technology poses a significant threat to people’s right to privacy. This paper argues that prioritizing security is far important that safeguarding people’s privacy since major ethical theories support this course of action.
To begin with, some people believe that security is more important than privacy. One of these people argue “I think we will always have privacy, however certain sectors will lose all of it” (What Privacy Means to men” (What Privacy Means to Me, Simmons). Such sentiments appreciate the fact that the right to privacy is not absolute. The government has the mandate to protect the security of the citizens from cybercrimes and terrorists, among other dangers. One of the ways in which the government can protect citizens from these harms is by having access to a robust amount of data about the masses in terms of their residents, place of work, internet usage, and movement history. The internet is awash with posts in which people express their anger towards certain groups of people for one reason or another. As such, it is highly implausible that the government can allocate its human and non-human resources towards tracking each of these posts. However, it would be easy for the security authorities to identify people with a higher possibility of realizing their threats by identifying their risk factors, such as affiliation to terrorist groups, criminal history, and travel history. Besides, it would be highly implausible if the government is to track down potential criminals and terrorists if it does not have crucial personal details about these entities.
On the other hand, there are those who argue that privacy is more important than security. One of them argues that “Privacy is a very important feature to have as it allows your information to be protected and private from other individuals” (What Privacy Means to Me, Peddicord). A violation of one’s right privacy can have a devastating effect on a person’s health and wellbeing in general. If personal information about one’s medical history lands on the wrong hands, it may have devastating effects on one’s wellbeing. For example, it may result in a person suffering from low self-esteem and depression. At the same time, some people believe that “Government isn’t updated enough to protect our privacy with technology” (The Top Priority, Ransom). Besides, the thought the government is watching the masses may be a depressing experience.
For me, I think that security is more important than privacy. To begin with, modern-day technologies have made the expectation of privacy almost implausible. For example, “Social medias will use what you view and what you search to filter certain advertisements that will reach that specific user based on their interests” (Privacy Assignment, Caudill). This means that people are freely giving out personal information to private enterprises and still think that they are exercising their rights to privacy. Besides, Axelrod argues that social media, the internet, and anonymous transactions have eliminated data privacy (1). For example, people willingly provide important personal details when they are signing up for various social networking sites or making online purchases. At the same time, “People should have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their entire lives” (What Privacy Means to Me, Rozman). The words “reasonable” mean that the right to privacy is not absolute. The exemptions to the right to privacy allow for the government to do its duty of protecting the public from any possible harm.
At the same time, major ethical theories support the decision to prioritize security over privacy. One of these theories is the deontological school of ethics, which considers an action as right or wrong by considering whether or not it fulfills a certain duty that the moral agent owes to another entity (Baumane-Vitolina, Cals, and Sumilo 111). For this theory, an action is right if it fulfills the duty to care that one entity owes to the other. On this note, the government has an obligation to protect the masses from any harm. At the same time, prioritizing security over privacy fulfills the Categorical Imperative doctrine. The Categorical Imperative believes that the right action is that which follows principles that the moral agent may be comfortable with if they are to be applied universally (Baumane-Vitolina et al. 111). On this note, the world would be a better place if people’s security is prioritized over their right to privacy. For example, imagine what happens when a person does not reveal the personal information of an individual suspected of planning to commit a heinous crime since the latter has the right to privacy.
Besides, ensuring that individual’s security is protected outweigh the risk associated with the violation of people’s right to privacy. The utilitarianism theory argues that “Each right is right if it increases satisfaction and happiness, and wrong-if it causes the opposite” (Baumane-Vitolina et al. 110). Over the recent past, the threat possessed by various local and international criminal organizations is immense, and it is growing every day. These organizations have access to the most sophisticated technologies and a wide array of skilled professionals. At the same time, these organizations are not limited by privacy regulations, which put the government at a disadvantaged position when it comes to thwarting the risks posed by the former. On the other hand, the harm likely to be caused by the violation of people’s right to privacy is minimal.
The other ethical theory is virtue ethics. This theory prioritizes the character of the moral agent than either outcome of his or her action or the duty he or she owes another entity (Baumane-Vitolina et al. 111). On this note, the government does not have any ill-intention when it chooses security over people’s right to privacy. At the same time, the government does not mean any harm when it seeks to have access to as much personal information as possible. For instance, it does not intend to sell this information to private companies.
To sum up, digital technology raises serious privacy issues. However, this paper has demonstrated that security takes precedence over privacy. Ethical theories, such as utilitarianism, deontology and virtue ethics, support the prioritization of security over privacy. Besides, the danger posed by modern technologies to the security of the citizens is significantly higher and has to be tamed by whatever method possible.
Works Cited
Axelrod, Warren C. “The new age of near-zero privacy. “ ISACA Journal, vol. 4, 2016, pp. 1-9.
Baumane-Vitolina, Ilona, Igo Cals, and Erika Sumilo. “Is ethics rational? Teleological, deontological and virtue ethics theories reconciled in the context of traditional economic decision making.” Procedia Economics and Finance, vol. 39, 2016, pp. 108-114.
Caudill, Caleb. “Privacy assignment.”
Ransom, Kadaby. “Top priority.”
Peddicord, Emilie. “What privacy means to me.”
Rozman, David. “What privacy means to me.”
Simmons, Brandon. “What privacy means to me.”