David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy and Social Criticism 25 (1):22-53 (1999)
The value of a negatively defined private space is defended as important for the development of personal autonomy. It is argued that negative liberty is problematic when split off from its connection with this ideal. An ethical interpretation of personal autonomy is proposed according to which a private space is one of autonomy's preconditions. This leads to a conceptualization of privacy that is fruitful in two respects: it permits an account of privacy laws that avoids certain pitfalls, and it serves as a basis for criticizing privacy-related failures of autonomy together with the social forces that produce them. Negative liberty is, furthermore, rejected as an adequate basis for modern law and democracy. Here, too, an ethically defined personal autonomy, of which negative liberty is a precondition, is held to be the most convincing normative foundation. A critical reading of Habermas' cooriginality thesis is offered in support of this argument. Key Words: cooriginality thesis Jürgen Habermas Herbert Marcuse negative liberty personal autonomy positive liberty privacy Martin Walser.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Maeve Cooke (2006). Salvaging and Secularizing the Semantic Contents of Religion: The Limitations of Habermas's Postmetaphysical Proposal. [REVIEW] International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 60 (1/3):187 - 207.
Maeve Cooke (2007). Salvaging and Secularizing the Semantic Contents of Religion: The Limitations of Habermas’s Postmetaphysical Proposal. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 60 (1-3):187-207.
Similar books and articles
Richard Volkman (2003). Privacy as Life, Liberty, Property. Ethics and Information Technology 5 (4):199-210.
Thomas Halper (1996). Privacy and Autonomy: From Warren and Brandeis to Roe and Cruzan. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (2):121-135.
Tuija Takala (2007). Respect for Autonomy and the Two Concepts of Liberty. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 1:69-72.
Dr James Wilson (2010). Giving Liberty Its Due, But No More: Trans Fats, Liberty, and Public Health. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (3):34-36.
Frederick Neuhouser (2011). Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the Origins of Autonomy. Inquiry 54 (5):478 - 493.
Steve Matthews (2008). Privacy, Separation, and Control. The Monist 91 (1):130-150.
Y. M. Barilan (2011). Respect for Personal Autonomy, Human Dignity, and the Problems of Self-Directedness and Botched Autonomy. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (5):496-515.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2010). The Liberal Value of Privacy. Law and Philosophy 29 (5):505-534.
Diane P. Michelfelder (2001). The Moral Value of Informational Privacy in Cyberspace. Ethics and Information Technology 3 (2):129-135.
Loren E. Lomasky (1990). Liberal Autonomy. Philosophy and Theology 4 (3):297-309.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads42 ( #94,303 of 1,789,836 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #315,593 of 1,789,836 )
How can I increase my downloads?