3 ms·
The problem is that he's not making the distinction between good secrets and bad secrets. If you do something bad and covert it up, it's a bad secret because i
by pshapiro 16y ago
The problem is that he's not making the distinction between good secrets and bad secrets.
If you do something bad and covert it up, it's a bad secret because it results in bad things and the politicians involved do not want to be associated with the result. Such a thing musn't be a secret. It's wrong to cover up a bad thing because it's hiding something that could hurt you and others in the future. If the government's job should be to keep the society's justice then it's absolutely necessary not to hide bad things otherwise they're lying. So it's not the government's place to hide bad secrets.
Good things don't need to be lauded (humility) and they don't need to be covered up either. Since it's not going to result in a bad thing and hurt the society then it doesn't have to revealed unless you would like to use the good thing. For example, if private stuff in his life is actually private and not hurting anyone else, then he should be allowed to keep the secret if he decides to because it's his own life.
If there is this principle to tell good and bad in people's activities then it solves his question.
- earle 16y agoand who is the judge to differentiate good and bad secrets?
- pshapiro 16y agoIt's the principle. A good thing makes a good result, bad thing makes a bad result. A good thing is something that has enough truth inside it to transmit 'what is' accurately. Bad things have too much falsehood to see the things correctly. imo you should judge things in the world for yourself after you've seen & confirmed what it is like. Edit: @hugh3 hope that makes more sense
- hugh3 16y agoA good thing makes a good result, bad thing makes a bad result. That half of what you said is circular, A good thing is something that has truth inside it. Bad things have falsehoods in them. and that half doesn't make much sense.
- pshapiro 16y agoCould you teach me how you format italic text like that?
- hugh3 16y agoMy principle, which I developed after thinking too much about it last week, is that if you happen to know a government secret (for a democratically-elected government) then it's morally both acceptable and right to leak it if and only if it reveals illegal behaviour on the part of some part of the government. It is necessary for the government to keep some things secret. The people who elect and pay for the government generally have no problem with this. The problem is that the government itself is the entity that decides which things it's allowed to keep secret, so various government agencies can do things that they shouldn't and then use government secrecy to hide it. The possibility of anonymous individuals with conscience leaking evidence of this kind of thing, when it happens, is an important part of making sure it doesn't. So I fully support this old-school leaking.