Several words used in the English language usually appear simple to define yet when met by the actual task of defining them we try to avert the task. This is not because the words are difficult to define but because the words do not have a universal definition. Most of these words are mostly used when in need of introducing a certain degree of ambiguity in the conversation. A good example of such a word is privacy.
Privacy is a word that does not have a universal meaning due to its relativistic nature. In fact, the word can only be defined from a relative point of view (Westin, 1967). Though many learners use it to mean secrecy in ones deeds or transactions, t entails more than the secrecy thus can only be defined when comparing two elements or works of art.
For a much general but not universal definition, privacy can be considered to be an ability of a person, group of people or community to separate from others in the neighborhood and keep some information from reaching the neighborhood (Gavison, 2000). This definition appears universal but by critical analysis, relation is involved when comparing the secluded party and the neighborhood.
Privacy can be said to be a general word with several definition due to its relativistic nature. Therefore, it is possible to outline types of privacy mostly encountered in the social sphere since privacy is a social word (exists due to existence of a society or many people) (Gavison, 2000).
One main category of privacy is the informational privacy (Wagner, 1997). This is the most common since information leaked can be dangerous to the person who leaked it. Informational privacy involves safeguarding and protecting information which may be stored in any form from reaching the untargeted group. This is the main type of privacy encountered when dealing with internet (Wagner, 1997). The information is relayed directly to the intended recipient. To ensure informational privacy mainly on the internet, encryption is used. Only the sender and the recipient understands the encryption thus any person who wrongly or by mistake receives the information does not understand its meaning.
Another content of privacy is organizational privacy. This is also similar to informational privacy but focuses on protecting the organizational structure of a firm, person or country. This privacy guards the party from piracy of the organizational structure or understanding of some weak points in the structure that can be used to bring down the owner of the structure (Wagner, 1997).
A third form of privacy is the intellectual or spiritual privacy. This type of privacy mainly focuses on personal qualities. It helps a person be free from intrusion on matters pertaining to intelligence or religion. This is mainly targeted at protecting the inner circle or sphere in a person’s life (Wagner, 1997).
In conclusion, the word is broad and its definition varies with the environment of use as well as the relationship between the two situations or objects under comparison. Therefore, a near universal but not universal definition can be ‘freedom from unauthorized intrusion’.
References
Wagner, J. 1997. In Pursuit of Privacy: Law, Ethics, and the Rise of Technology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press
Westin, A,.1967. Privacy and Freedom. New York: Athenaeum
Gavison, R. 2000. Privacy and the Limits of the Law. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.
