Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 January 2009
An alleged moral right to informational privacy assumes that we should have control over information about ourselves. What is the philosophical justification for this control? I think that one prevalent answer to this question—an answer that has to do with the justification of negative rights generally—will not do.
1 See Hohfeld, Wesley Newcomb, Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1919).Google Scholar
2 Thomson, Judith Jarvis, The Realm of Rights (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
3 Steiner, Hillel, An Essay on Rights (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1996).Google Scholar
4 Dworkin, Ronald, Taking Rights Seriously (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977).Google Scholar
5 Nozick, Robert, Anarchy, State, and Utopia (New York: Basic Books, 1974).Google Scholar
6 Thomson, Judith Jarvis, “The Right to Privacy” Philosophy and Public Affairs 4, no. 4 (Summer 1975): 295–314Google Scholar, reprinted in Thomson, , Rights, Restitution, and Risk (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986), 117–34.Google Scholar
7 Finnis, John, Natural Law and Natural Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980).Google Scholar
8 In this and the next section, I adapt material from my “Ethics, Politics, and Negative Rights,” American Philosophical Association Newsletter 88, no. 1 (11 1988): 24–30.Google Scholar
9 Dworkin, , Taking Rights Seriously, xv.Google Scholar
10 Hume, David, A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1888), 503.Google Scholar
11 Finnis, , Natural Law and Natural Rights.Google Scholar
12 See, e.g., Beardsley, Elizabeth, “Privacy: Autonomy and Selective Disclosure,” in Pennock, J. Roland and Chapman, John W., eds., NOMOS XIII: Privacy (New York: Atherton Press, 1971), 56–70Google Scholar. See also Kupfer, Joseph, “Privacy, Autonomy, and Self-Concept,” American Philosophical Quarterly 24, no. 2 (01 1987): 81–89.Google Scholar