Inquiry, the Alignment Challenge, the Risk View, and the Right to Privacy

In the privacy literature, epistemic analyses of privacy are quite popular. However, epistemic accounts of the right to privacy face substantial challenges. Epistemic analyses of privacy also suffer from the prima facie puzzling alignment challenge (according to which there are cases when an individual’s right to privacy is violated even if their privacy is unaffected). A recent proposal by Lauritz Aastrup Munch provides a solution to these issues by defending the so-called “inquiry account of the right to privacy.” In this paper, it is argued that the inquiry account of the right to privacy must be rejected and that the project is misguided, as the underlying extensional evidence does not reveal much about the conceptual and normative nature of privacy and the right to privacy. That is, the alignment challenge is surprisingly not puzzling after all, because—as will be argued—it has a simple solution that has nothing to do with privacy and privacy rights as such, but generalizes to other values/interests and the rights thereto. Specifically, I will defend an idea from my earlier work according to which the right to privacy can be violated by actions that (substantially) risk the diminishment of someone’s privacy.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy & Technology
Published
2026-04-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-026-01070-z
Primary Topic
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Inquiry, the Alignment Challenge, the Risk View, and the Right to Privacy

Björn Lundgren
Philosophy & Technology
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
article

Inquiry, the Alignment Challenge, the Risk View, and the Right to Privacy

Björn Lundgren
article en

Abstract

In the privacy literature, epistemic analyses of privacy are quite popular. However, epistemic accounts of the right to privacy face substantial challenges. Epistemic analyses of privacy also suffer from the prima facie puzzling alignment challenge (according to which there are cases when an individual’s right to privacy is violated even if their privacy is unaffected). A recent proposal by Lauritz Aastrup Munch provides a solution to these issues by defending the so-called “inquiry account of the right to privacy.” In this paper, it is argued that the inquiry account of the right to privacy must be rejected and that the project is misguided, as the underlying extensional evidence does not reveal much about the conceptual and normative nature of privacy and the right to privacy. That is, the alignment challenge is surprisingly not puzzling after all, because—as will be argued—it has a simple solution that has nothing to do with privacy and privacy rights as such, but generalizes to other values/interests and the rights thereto. Specifically, I will defend an idea from my earlier work according to which the right to privacy can be violated by actions that (substantially) risk the diminishment of someone’s privacy.

Philosophy & TechnologyVol. 39(2)
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.