In defense of privacy
There is no shortage of threats to an individual's privacy in the contemporary world. At any time, it is possible for any citizen to be subjected to an invasion of their personal privacy in a number of different ways. In this thesis I outline three differing perspectives from which society can view issues pertaining to individual privacy. Using differing political theories as advocates of each perspective, I analyze the logical results and the effects each perspective has on society at large. Whichever perspective we adopt has great influence over legislative discretion, legal rules, and executive authority when issues of privacy arise. The influence a society has when adopting one perspective of privacy permits and restricts certain government actions. For example, our contemporary perspective of privacy as an interest that is only valuable to the extent that it can be sold, illustrates to authorities that all that is required to invade someone's privacy is sufficient compensation. Through my analysis, I find that the perspective of privacy viewed by the Classical Republican tradition is best in most circumstances, and that it is best for any society to maintain the broadest political view.