Question 1

Taylor responds to the consequentialist version of the objection from potential abuse by distinguishing between

Accepted Answer

The answer of Taylor responds to the consequentialist version of...

Question 2

Taylor argues that universal state surveillance will compromise the autonomy of

Accepted Answer

The answer of Taylor argues that universal state surveillance will...

Question 3

According to Taylor, privacy is a(n) _______ notion.

Accepted Answer

Taylor argues that privacy is a relative notion, meaning that it can vary depending on cultural, historical, and social contexts. It is not an absolute concept that remains fixed over time and across different contexts.

Question 4

Taylor claims that his position on universal State surveillance flows from a plausible and widely held view. What is this view and how does it support Taylor's position?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Taylor claims that his position on universal...

Question 5

Taylor clarifies his position on universal State surveillance with two important qualifications. What are these two qualifications, and do they succeed in alleviating concerns about universal State surveillance in your view? Defend your answer.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Taylor clarifies his position on universal State...

Question 6

Taylor considers two initial objections to universal State surveillance. What are these two objections and how does Taylor respond to them? Is Taylor's response persuasive? Why or why not?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Taylor considers two initial objections to universal...

Question 7

Case Study
In 2017, a 25-year-old Air Force veteran and translator for the National Security Agency by the name of Reality Winner leaked a classified government report to the online news outlet The Intercept. The top-secret document, which The Intercept subsequently published, contained detailed evidence of hacking attacks by the Russian government against local election officials and voter registration databases during the 2016 United States presidential election. At the time of the leak, many prominent American politicians, as well as several influential media outlets, disputed claims that the Russian government had attempted to interfere in the election.
On the day that The Intercept published the report, Winner was arrested and charged under the Espionage Act. In 2018, she was sentenced to over five years in prison, the longest sentence ever given in federal court for an unauthorized disclosure of government information to the media. (Read more from HYPERLINK "https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/23/us/reality-winner-nsa-sentence.html" New York Times)
-What is your view of Winner's actions? Was what she did wrong? Why or why not? If you do think her actions were wrong, was the government justified in punishing her so severely? Why or why not?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Case Study
In 2017, a 25-year-old Air Force...

Question 8

Case Study
In 2017, a 25-year-old Air Force veteran and translator for the National Security Agency by the name of Reality Winner leaked a classified government report to the online news outlet The Intercept. The top-secret document, which The Intercept subsequently published, contained detailed evidence of hacking attacks by the Russian government against local election officials and voter registration databases during the 2016 United States presidential election. At the time of the leak, many prominent American politicians, as well as several influential media outlets, disputed claims that the Russian government had attempted to interfere in the election.
On the day that The Intercept published the report, Winner was arrested and charged under the Espionage Act. In 2018, she was sentenced to over five years in prison, the longest sentence ever given in federal court for an unauthorized disclosure of government information to the media. (Read more from HYPERLINK "https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/23/us/reality-winner-nsa-sentence.html" New York Times)
-How might a consequentialist evaluate Winner's actions? What potential harms and benefits would have to be considered? What do you think a consequentialist would ultimately conclude?

Accepted Answer