Leavitt Frank J
Medical Ethics Centre, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel.
ScientificWorldJournal. 2011 Mar 1;11:463-73. doi: 10.1100/tsw.2011.47.
Ancient Greek and 17th century English philosophy are not usually discussed along with the ethics of biometrics and data sharing. Academic ethics today, however, suffers from a lack of background in classical texts. We may discuss whether biometrics and data sharing are consistent with democracy, but if we do not know what democracy is, then we cannot know what actions are consistent with it. I shall discuss how and why democracies have restricted the rights of their citizens. I will give the most attention to two paradigms that have most influenced modern democratic thinking: 17th century English democracy and ancient Athens. I do not accept the dogma that the Athenians were obviously wrong to try and then to condemn Socrates. His death-loving doctrine could not but have weakened the will of the youth to work and fight for the good of Athens. I will try to understand the Athenians' point of view and their need to defend their security. At the end, I will apply these lessons to biometrics and data sharing for security reasons.
古希腊哲学和17世纪的英国哲学通常不会与生物识别技术伦理及数据共享一同被讨论。然而，当今的学术伦理缺乏古典文本方面的背景知识。我们可以讨论生物识别技术和数据共享是否与民主相符，但如果我们不知道民主是什么，那么我们就无法知晓哪些行为与之相符。我将探讨民主国家如何以及为何限制其公民的权利。我将重点关注对现代民主思想影响最大的两种范式：17世纪的英国民主和古雅典。我不认同那种认为雅典人审判并处死苏格拉底明显错误的教条。他热爱死亡的学说必然削弱了年轻人为雅典的福祉而工作和战斗的意志。我将试图理解雅典人的观点以及他们捍卫自身安全的需求。最后，出于安全考虑，我将把这些经验教训应用于生物识别技术和数据共享。
