Does anybody have the right to say, you dont have the right to know?
-
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
-
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
I suspect that there's an unanswered question here. That is, what if the things being hidden are not facts ? Either way, I am all for free speech, I think that lies are best exposed in the light of day, not left to fester in a secret place. The greater good is obviously in the eye of the beholder, which is another reason why it's not a good reason for mind control. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
-
I suspect that there's an unanswered question here. That is, what if the things being hidden are not facts ? Either way, I am all for free speech, I think that lies are best exposed in the light of day, not left to fester in a secret place. The greater good is obviously in the eye of the beholder, which is another reason why it's not a good reason for mind control. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Christian Graus wrote:
what if the things being hidden are not facts ?
Well, even if they are not, does anybody have the right ot say, you dont have to know what Mr XYZ wrote about the PQRST Government in ABCD website. Does anybody have the right to BAN cartoons in some newspaper because some section of the population will not like it? Right is actually a very misleading word. It has acquired to mean, something that is bestowed just because you are..... because you exist. But, it in reality it only means how much freedom the strongest man around (most often it is the government) gives you.
Christian Graus wrote:
The greater good is obviously in the eye of the beholder
An unspoken greater good is always lying underneath. Thats the dilemma. Abhishek
-
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
Well for example I'm all for the knowledge required to produce Genetically Modified Bio Weapons etc to be supressed for as long as possible. From what I've read some of the 'products' that where produced at Vector and Biopreparat are truly scary and have no legitimate purpose other than wiping human life from the face of the planet :(( So 1. In some circumstances 2. Yes if it genuinely is for the greater good and not just repression and control 3. Obviously this is a value judgement
-
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
AbhishekBK wrote:
The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"?
I don't see why we (or any other country, for that matter) should make available facts such as where its nukes are stored, where the troops are concentrated, and so on. #1 Under a very limited set of circumstances (see above), yes. #2 Hard to answer, since what he defines as 'greater good' is not necessarily my definition of 'greater good'. In other words, who watches the watchmen? #3 N/A That said, I don't see how blocking a bunch of blogging websites is going to protect us from terrorists. :| Cheers, Vikram.
"I am not Jesus and will never be. The fact is I was a piece of cr*p till I found Him." - Paul Selormey.
-
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
Its a tricky thing, in Ireland for years we continually hushed things up, secrecy caused a poision in our nation that will take many years to heal. (See Tribunals of Inquiry). At its worst it caused hundreds of people to become infected with "HIV and Hepatitis C" (See the Lindsay Tribunal). Granted there are always legitimate reasons to keep things secret, but we now have the Freedom of Information Act and Independent Commissioner that decides what the government has the right to keep secret. Also we have the reformed Irish Censor, who tends to try and educate more than censor. You can read an nostaligic aritcle on Irish Censorship on Wikipedia to see what things used to be like. It reminds me very much of India today, I remember a GP in my lifetime being arrested for selling condoms. Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire" Blogging @ Keratoconus Watch
-
AbhishekBK wrote:
The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"?
I don't see why we (or any other country, for that matter) should make available facts such as where its nukes are stored, where the troops are concentrated, and so on. #1 Under a very limited set of circumstances (see above), yes. #2 Hard to answer, since what he defines as 'greater good' is not necessarily my definition of 'greater good'. In other words, who watches the watchmen? #3 N/A That said, I don't see how blocking a bunch of blogging websites is going to protect us from terrorists. :| Cheers, Vikram.
"I am not Jesus and will never be. The fact is I was a piece of cr*p till I found Him." - Paul Selormey.
Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:
That said, I don't see how blocking a bunch of blogging websites is going to protect us from terrorists.
Most of the blocked sites were pro-Hinduism sites and one of them was a site that contained links to BJP and RSS websites :-) Looks like the Govt was trying to improve its popularity among minority religions :-) The blocked blogs had nothing to do with terrorism! Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New) -
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
-
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
AbhishekBK wrote:
1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct?
No.
AbhishekBK wrote:
2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind?
The censors always think their myopia is for the greater good.
AbhishekBK wrote:
3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good?
A "yes" should and can never exist.
"The key, the whole key, and nothing but the key, so help me Codd"
-
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
The gov't here in the States tries to restrict what we know about there business. You can't have a truly free society with a secret govenrment. The ends NEVER justify the means (ask hitler) A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the Universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." -- Stephen Crane
-
Well, it might be because of the recent blocking of major site by the Indian government. But it brings us to a question every democracy faces. Especially a democracy where people are, only now becoming mare and more aware of their rights. Like in India. The question is: In principle, does anybody have the right to say "You don’t have the right to know"? You see the government is always busy blocking stuff. What will you guys say about this? A few questions will arise: 1. Is restricting someone from knowing facts morally correct? 2. Does it morally become correct if the person restricting the information has the greater good in mind? 3. If yes, how does he know what is the greater good? America is a country I admire. Not for its wealth, but because it is the land where man has the maximum right to say and know. Abhishek
The little town of Bowmanville that I live in is currently trying to answer this same question. About a month ago, our quite popular mayor was arrested and charged with two counts of assault. At his bail hearing, the judge announced a publication ban upon all proceedings. So of course the rumour mills are currently spreading all sorts of truths/half-truths/lies. The reason for the ban is actualy quite common. Because one of the victims of the alleged offence is a minor, all trial proceedings have a publication ban placed upon them in effort to protect the victim's identity. Interestingly though, the mayor is out on bail, is living with his father now instead of at home with his wife and daughter and this fall is up for re-election. I wish him luck, cause he's gonna need it. Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] When no one was looking, every single American woman between the ages of 18 and 32 went out and got a tatoo just above their rumpus. [link[^]]
-
Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:
That said, I don't see how blocking a bunch of blogging websites is going to protect us from terrorists.
Most of the blocked sites were pro-Hinduism sites and one of them was a site that contained links to BJP and RSS websites :-) Looks like the Govt was trying to improve its popularity among minority religions :-) The blocked blogs had nothing to do with terrorism! Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New)I didn't know that; but now that I do, I'm not surprised. :| Cheers, Vikram.
"I am not Jesus and will never be. The fact is I was a piece of cr*p till I found Him." - Paul Selormey.
