1. The balance between protecting privacy and the meetings of the needs of national security is not an easy task. I believe that a person's privacy is very important. I also believe that national security is also important. I think a fair balance would be to let a government invade a person's privacy only if that person raises a level of suspicion. This level of suspicion would have to meet a checklist of requirements. So in theory, if a person meets half of the requirements, it would be illegal for his privacy to be violated. In more general terms, a balance in this scenario would be meeting the needs of an individual's privacy and that of national security.
2.I was surprised that so many of those books were banned. I was actually glad that those books were not banned in my high school. I think certain books should be banned. It true that some of those contents are indeed inappropriate and the ban should be that of an age requirement. For example, only high school students should be allowed to read The Color Purple. The reason for this is that young readers will not be able to comprehend the advanced concepts in those books and misinterpret the book because of the use of profanities. Some books should definitely be banned. The Anarchist Cookbook, for example, only serves to harm others and there is no relevant need for books like that.
3.My overall information ethics have not really changed by completing this unit. I strongly believe in fairness. I believe in privacy and that of national security. I want to be able to be safe and free to have my own ideas.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Privacy: I am glad you recognize the complexity of this issue. Who would determine a "level of suspicion"? And who would define the "checklist of requirements"? In the last several years, privacy laws have been weakened, allowing authorities more right to invade people's privacy. Also, technology has made it possible to invade privacy in ways that weren't possible before.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to banned books and censorship, we disagree. I don't think books should be banned. When it comes to children, I think parents have the responsibility to determine what is appropriate for their children. I don't think the materials should be banned to everyone. If you do decide to ban books, who determines which books to ban and by what criteria? Where does it stop? If you were glad these books weren't banned in your high school, why do you want to ban them for the next students?