Privacy is inherently a cultural creation, influenced and changed by the culture in which it resides. Due to the cultural nature of privacy, the understanding of what is considered private changes on a cultural basis. Something one culture may perceive to be an everyday thing and not a private matter, another culture may find that to be completely taboo and only a private matter. This concept translates directly to the concept of digital privacy. Some culture may not be bothered by a government or other organization knowing what websites they visit, whereas another such as the US or many EU countries may have an established base of privacy and expect their history to be private to themselves. People of different cultures have different acceptance
…show more content…
These values directly influence a person’s understanding of privacy and what should be considered private. As outlined in his book Cosmopolitanism, Appiah outlines his concept of human nature and human culture. He believes that everyone is part of a single human community and that we all have an obligation to each other to support each other’s rights. “The real challenge to cosmopolitanism isn’t the belief that other people don’t matter at all; it’s the belief that they don’t matter very much” (Appiah 153). This concept transfers to the concept of digital privacy very well. Just because people in another country have less rights than somewhere else does not mean we should not intervene simply because they still have some rights. We must fight until everyone has equal rights. When looking at digital privacy it is important to look at how this problem can be solved with everyone in mind. One way of doing this would be to look at the work Nussbaum did when she created her list of human capabiliets. This list was designed to examine the level of human rights in any culture by examining their access to essential capabilities. She designed this list to allow for cultural variation, yet be blanket enough to ensure that people had the rights everyone should deserve. Her final capability the right to control one’s environment ties directly into the concept of privacy. Each person should have control over what they choose to share with the public or government organization. When looking at digital privacy, it is important to know that some consensus needs to be made, but this consensus needs to allow for cultural
These values directly influence a person’s understanding of privacy and what should be considered private. As outlined in his book Cosmopolitanism, Appiah outlines his concept of human nature and human culture. He believes that everyone is part of a single human community and that we all have an obligation to each other to support each other’s rights. “The real challenge to cosmopolitanism isn’t the belief that other people don’t matter at all; it’s the belief that they don’t matter very much” (Appiah 153). This concept transfers to the concept of digital privacy very well. Just because people in another country have less rights than somewhere else does not mean we should not intervene simply because they still have some rights. We must fight until everyone has equal rights. When looking at digital privacy it is important to look at how this problem can be solved with everyone in mind. One way of doing this would be to look at the work Nussbaum did when she created her list of human capabiliets. This list was designed to examine the level of human rights in any culture by examining their access to essential capabilities. She designed this list to allow for cultural variation, yet be blanket enough to ensure that people had the rights everyone should deserve. Her final capability the right to control one’s environment ties directly into the concept of privacy. Each person should have control over what they choose to share with the public or government organization. When looking at digital privacy, it is important to know that some consensus needs to be made, but this consensus needs to allow for cultural