Should people have a right to privacy?

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
Post Reply
GE Morton
Posts: 4696
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by GE Morton »

Pattern-chaser wrote: May 30th, 2022, 3:24 am
The much-vaunted American focus on 'freedom' of speech tends to distract us from other, possibly more important (?), rights. How about the right to privacy, or confidentiality, for a start? This is what we're discussing here, isn't it?
There is no natural or common right to privacy or confidentiality, other than may be acquired via some sort of contract or promise. There could be a legal right to it, of course --- one can invent legal rights to anything. There is a natural right to freedom of speech.
I think there should be some information that may not be made public under any circumstances, other that may only be made public with the explicit permission of the person concerned, and so forth. What justification could there be for any other course?
Information is knowledge. Any knowledge you possess remains private/confidential only as long as you reveal it to no one. If you reveal it, it will be either voluntarily or under duress, or via the use of force. If voluntarily, you may demand a promise from the person to whom you reveal it not to further disclose it. If obtained from you via duress or force --- say, by drugging you, threatening you, stealing it from you, or beating it out of you --- you have recourse for those violations of your rights. If revealed by a third party to whom you've conveyed it in confidence, you have civil recourse against that person.

What other recourse do you think necessary?

"Three people can keep a secret --- if two of them are dead."
---Benj. Franklin
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

GE Morton wrote: May 30th, 2022, 12:49 pm There is no natural or common right to privacy or confidentiality, other than may be acquired via some sort of contract or promise. There could be a legal right to it, of course --- one can invent legal rights to anything. There is a natural right to freedom of speech.
There's a natural right to freedom of speech? What's that, then?


GE Morton wrote: May 30th, 2022, 12:49 pm Information is knowledge. Any knowledge you possess remains private/confidential only as long as you reveal it to no one. If you reveal it, it will be either voluntarily or under duress, or via the use of force. If voluntarily, you may demand a promise from the person to whom you reveal it not to further disclose it. If obtained from you via duress or force --- say, by drugging you, threatening you, stealing it from you, or beating it out of you --- you have recourse for those violations of your rights. If revealed by a third party to whom you've conveyed it in confidence, you have civil recourse against that person.

What other recourse do you think necessary?
Something to preserve my privacy in the face of the 'rights' of people (and commercial enterprises) who believe, as you do, that profit is the only determining factor here. IMO, there are some human values that trump commercial ones, and sadly, this can only be achieved by coercion. It seems we cannot simply respect the privacy of others without a rule to tell us we should and must. 😥
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
GE Morton
Posts: 4696
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by GE Morton »

Pattern-chaser wrote: May 31st, 2022, 7:23 am
GE Morton wrote: May 30th, 2022, 12:49 pm There is no natural or common right to privacy or confidentiality, other than may be acquired via some sort of contract or promise. There could be a legal right to it, of course --- one can invent legal rights to anything. There is a natural right to freedom of speech.
There's a natural right to freedom of speech? What's that, then?
Natural rights are rights to one's natural possessions --- the assets you brought with you into the world, such as your body, your life, your various capacities and abilities. Included among the latter is the ability to speak.
GE Morton wrote: May 30th, 2022, 12:49 pm Information is knowledge. Any knowledge you possess remains private/confidential only as long as you reveal it to no one. If you reveal it, it will be either voluntarily or under duress, or via the use of force. If voluntarily, you may demand a promise from the person to whom you reveal it not to further disclose it. If obtained from you via duress or force --- say, by drugging you, threatening you, stealing it from you, or beating it out of you --- you have recourse for those violations of your rights. If revealed by a third party to whom you've conveyed it in confidence, you have civil recourse against that person.

What other recourse do you think necessary?
Something to preserve my privacy in the face of the 'rights' of people (and commercial enterprises) who believe, as you do, that profit is the only determining factor here. IMO, there are some human values that trump commercial ones, and sadly, this can only be achieved by coercion. It seems we cannot simply respect the privacy of others without a rule to tell us we should and must. 😥
[/quote]

Well, the question was, what that "something" might be. Most commercial enterprises with whom you do business have privacy policies, which you're invited to read and accept before doing business with them. Those policies typically spell out what information they will share, and with whom. If you find those policies unacceptable, you can decline to do business with them. What more would you suggest?

As for what "human values" trump "commercial ones": First, the value of engaging in commerce is itself a "human value." And which values trump which is subjective and idiosyncratic. Many people, for example, find the advantages of doing business with Amazon trump the annoyance of spam emails and targeted ads.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Sy Borg »

Count Lucanor wrote: May 29th, 2022, 12:13 pmAnyway, the principles of individual rights are not absolute. As always, there are limits, and as the old saying goes: "your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins".
This post provides the crux of the freedom debate. Any discussion of freedom that does not take the balance of needs is not philosophical, just advocacy.

Whose freedom? The arm swingers' or the nose owners'? The gun owners or those most in the firing line? Privacy breachers or the breached?
GE Morton
Posts: 4696
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by GE Morton »

Sy Borg wrote: May 31st, 2022, 8:06 pm
Count Lucanor wrote: May 29th, 2022, 12:13 pmAnyway, the principles of individual rights are not absolute. As always, there are limits, and as the old saying goes: "your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins".
This post provides the crux of the freedom debate. Any discussion of freedom that does not take the balance of needs is not philosophical, just advocacy.

Whose freedom? The arm swingers' or the nose owners'? The gun owners or those most in the firing line? Privacy breachers or the breached?
Well, Sy, Count Lucanor's comment doesn't address the question. His "other man" unquestionably has a right to his nose, and damaging it is unquestionably a violation of that right. But the question here is whether anyone has a "right to privacy," in the "secret" sense defined earlier. I.e., whether Alfie has a right that Bruno not disclose certain knowledge he may have about Alfie. Or in other words, whether Alfie has some right to restrict Bruno's freedom to share his knowledge.

No such right has been recognized historically, in the absence of a promise or agreement (explicit or implicit) not to disclose it. That doesn't mean such a right could not be morally justified --- it might be, if disclosure of certain information might inflict some harm or loss on Alfie. That is the rationale behind the libel/slander exception to free speech. But that exception only applies if the speech is false; Alfie cannot claim libel if the information Bruno reveals about him is true.

There is also an issue of what is to count as a "harm." Are embarrassment, public ridicule or humiliation or ostracism, fewer opportunities for employment or personal relationships, etc., to be considered "harms"?

In most (if not all) US states convicted sex offenders after release from prison must regularly report their addresses, which, with their names, are listed on a State-maintained public database. Would your "right to privacy" prohibit the State --- and perhaps 3rd parties, including victims --- from disclosing that information?

There is also a movement underway to "ban the box" --- i.e., checkboxes on employment applications which ask if the applicant has ever been convicted of a felony. These advocates (lefties, of course) apparently believe that a convicted criminal is entitled to keep his criminal past secret. Is he?
User avatar
Count Lucanor
Posts: 2318
Joined: May 6th, 2017, 5:08 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Umberto Eco
Location: Panama
Contact:

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Count Lucanor »

GE Morton wrote: May 31st, 2022, 10:17 pm Well, Sy, Count Lucanor's comment doesn't address the question. His "other man" unquestionably has a right to his nose, and damaging it is unquestionably a violation of that right. But the question here is whether anyone has a "right to privacy," in the "secret" sense defined earlier. I.e., whether Alfie has a right that Bruno not disclose certain knowledge he may have about Alfie. Or in other words, whether Alfie has some right to restrict Bruno's freedom to share his knowledge.

No such right has been recognized historically...
Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Universal rights are universal only in the ideal realm of the abstract. Since they are actually social constructs, they are also dependent of context to apply. Having a right does not guarantee its exercise under any circumstances, because one right might clash with another. One man's fist and one man's nose. That's why the term "arbitrarily" is required when describing many rights in the Declaration of Human Rights, implying that under certain circumstances, you're not entitled to that protection. My right to move freely ends if I end up in prison.
The wise are instructed by reason, average minds by experience, the stupid by necessity and the brute by instinct.
― Marcus Tullius Cicero
GE Morton
Posts: 4696
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by GE Morton »

Count Lucanor wrote: May 31st, 2022, 11:44 pm
GE Morton wrote: May 31st, 2022, 10:17 pm Well, Sy, Count Lucanor's comment doesn't address the question. His "other man" unquestionably has a right to his nose, and damaging it is unquestionably a violation of that right. But the question here is whether anyone has a "right to privacy," in the "secret" sense defined earlier. I.e., whether Alfie has a right that Bruno not disclose certain knowledge he may have about Alfie. Or in other words, whether Alfie has some right to restrict Bruno's freedom to share his knowledge.

No such right has been recognized historically...
Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
When I said "historically," I meant in the liberal tradition and the common law. The UN Declaration consists largely of "fiat rights" ("frights") which are arbitrary inventions of politicians; they have no factual basis and no moral significance. That one is especially inane --- no "attacks on his honor or reputation"? That would outlaw virtually all political speech, and contradicts the affirmation of the right to free speech in Article 19.
Universal rights are universal only in the ideal realm of the abstract. Since they are actually social constructs, they are also dependent of context to apply. Having a right does not guarantee its exercise under any circumstances, because one right might clash with another. One man's fist and one man's nose. That's why the term "arbitrarily" is required when describing many rights in the Declaration of Human Rights, implying that under certain circumstances, you're not entitled to that protection. My right to move freely ends if I end up in prison.
Rights are indeed social constructs. All of morality (and science) are social constructs. But real rights have a factual basis and a moral foundation, namely, that one ought not inflict unjustified harms or losses on other moral agents. "Arbitrarily" is inserted in order to render the alleged "right" meaningless and thus open to any ideologue's interpretation.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Sy Borg »

GE, you spoke about legalities but not about the ethics. It's about the ethics of disclosing private information about others who, naturally enough, prefer their private information to remain private; otherwise they would have made those things public. IMO it's enormously selfish, presumptuous and reckless to reveal others' private information without their go-ahead. It could trigger depression or worse.

Of course, there's no law against selfishness or presumptuousness, nor about trying to make someone feel depressed for one's own gratification. There is no law against sadism. In some sectors of societies, taboos against cruelty are loosening, which results in growing toxicity.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

GE Morton wrote: May 30th, 2022, 12:49 pm There is no natural or common right to privacy or confidentiality, other than may be acquired via some sort of contract or promise. There could be a legal right to it, of course --- one can invent legal rights to anything. There is a natural right to freedom of speech.
Pattern-chaser wrote: May 31st, 2022, 7:23 am There's a natural right to freedom of speech? What's that, then?
GE Morton wrote: May 31st, 2022, 10:30 am Natural rights are rights to one's natural possessions --- the assets you brought with you into the world, such as your body, your life, your various capacities and abilities. Included among the latter is the ability to speak.
I don't question or challenge your natural ability to speak. I ask what is your "natural right to freedom of speech"?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

GE Morton wrote: May 30th, 2022, 12:49 pm Information is knowledge. Any knowledge you possess remains private/confidential only as long as you reveal it to no one. If you reveal it, it will be either voluntarily or under duress, or via the use of force. If voluntarily, you may demand a promise from the person to whom you reveal it not to further disclose it. If obtained from you via duress or force --- say, by drugging you, threatening you, stealing it from you, or beating it out of you --- you have recourse for those violations of your rights. If revealed by a third party to whom you've conveyed it in confidence, you have civil recourse against that person.

What other recourse do you think necessary?
Pattern-chaser wrote: May 31st, 2022, 7:23 am Something to preserve my privacy in the face of the 'rights' of people (and commercial enterprises) who believe, as you do, that profit is the only determining factor here. IMO, there are some human values that trump commercial ones, and sadly, this can only be achieved by coercion. It seems we cannot simply respect the privacy of others without a rule to tell us we should and must. 😥
GE Morton wrote: May 31st, 2022, 10:30 am Well, the question was, what that "something" might be. Most commercial enterprises with whom you do business have privacy policies, which you're invited to read and accept before doing business with them. Those policies typically spell out what information they will share, and with whom. If you find those policies unacceptable, you can decline to do business with them. What more would you suggest?
I would suggest that we turn what you have described on its head. Instead of me having to accept the companies' privacy policy to do business with them, I would prefer that the companies accept my privacy preferences, as the cost of obtaining my custom.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

GE Morton wrote: May 31st, 2022, 10:17 pm There is also an issue of what is to count as a "harm." Are embarrassment, public ridicule or humiliation or ostracism, fewer opportunities for employment or personal relationships, etc., to be considered "harms"?
Surely, yes! That which causes harm, that which is harmful, is "harm". There are degrees of severity, and thereby degrees of harm, but harm is whatever is harmful, that can't be changed. Public ridicule, for example, can and does do enormous harm to the person concerned, and such harm might last for a lifetime, in some cases.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Good_Egg
Posts: 782
Joined: January 27th, 2022, 5:12 am

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Good_Egg »

Seems to me that there is no self-evident moral right to privacy - it's not any sort of first principle.

But it is entirely possible that if we were to consider the ethics of a range of situations involving disclosure of images or information which others would prefer to keep secret, we might come to some sort of rule of thumb for which "right to privacy" might stand as useful shorthand.

The starting point might be that everyone edits the persona - the mask - that they show to others. Plays a role, to some extent, in order to be accepted by others as part of the group.

We desire a private space where we can wash or scratch or tend to those parts of our body that it is taboo to display in public. Wear unflattering clothes that are merely comfortable. Enjoy experiences that are deeply uncool. Indulge our perversion and fetishes. Etc. Can inhabit those parts of ourselves that aren't part of the public image.

And we don't want others to enter our private space without permission, to gain the knowledge or the visual image of these aspects of our private selves, and to make that knowledge or those images public.

Can we will it to be a universal rule that nobody should ever breach anyone else's privacy ? I suspect not.

To be in private what we're not in public is a sort of lie. And we also desire to know the truth about others. Particularly those we are about to trust (whether with public office or with partnership in a commercial venture or with intimacy).

My image of you is part of what you're selling when you propose yourself to me in any of those contexts. And arguably I have a legitimate interest in knowing how much of that image is a lie.

So it's not simple.
"Opinions are fiercest.. ..when the evidence to support or refute them is weakest" - Druin Burch
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Good_Egg wrote: June 1st, 2022, 9:34 am Can we will it to be a universal rule that nobody should ever breach anyone else's privacy ? I suspect not.
I suspect that we can. ... But 'rules are made to be broken', and there will always be some circumstances where this is appropriate. But mostly, we can and should allow people the privacy they crave. IMO.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
GE Morton
Posts: 4696
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by GE Morton »

Sy Borg wrote: June 1st, 2022, 2:26 am GE, you spoke about legalities but not about the ethics. It's about the ethics of disclosing private information about others who, naturally enough, prefer their private information to remain private; otherwise they would have made those things public. IMO it's enormously selfish, presumptuous and reckless to reveal others' private information without their go-ahead. It could trigger depression or worse.
Oh, I agree with you that disclosing certain personal information about someone can be unethical, either because it was given to you with the understanding that you would keep it confidential, or because disclosing it could bring foreseeable harms to the subject (such as disclosing a credit card number). But in your OP you mentioned "regulatory responses," i.e., legalities. So I assumed you were advocating some laws.

I think you have in mind cases where certain information about Alfie is known to some people, but not to "the public" at large, e.g., that Alfie is gay. Most people who know Alfie other than casually will know that, but it is not public knowledge. Arguably, it would be unethical to publish that information on a public web site when there is some probability that some bigoted members of that public will do harm to Alfie (a high probability, if the site was one which catered to bigots).

But then, again, what is to count as a "harm"? We don't count subjective, idiosyncratic emotional reactions as "harms." Bruno cannot possibly know what will "trigger depression" in Alfie, unless he knows Alfie well. Nor can we count social effects, such as embarrassment, ostracism, ridicule, as "harms." No one has any "right" to the approval, affection, or admiration of others, nor to acceptance by them. Alfie suffers no loss or injury if anyone declines to extend those to him.
Of course, there's no law against selfishness or presumptuousness, nor about trying to make someone feel depressed for one's own gratification.
Well, there I disagree. If Bruno knows what will induce depression in Alfie, and intentionally attempts to induce it, that would be unethical, and probably illegal as well.
GE Morton
Posts: 4696
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Should people have a right to privacy?

Post by GE Morton »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 1st, 2022, 6:40 am
GE Morton wrote: May 30th, 2022, 12:49 pm There is no natural or common right to privacy or confidentiality, other than may be acquired via some sort of contract or promise. There could be a legal right to it, of course --- one can invent legal rights to anything. There is a natural right to freedom of speech.
Pattern-chaser wrote: May 31st, 2022, 7:23 am There's a natural right to freedom of speech? What's that, then?
GE Morton wrote: May 31st, 2022, 10:30 am Natural rights are rights to one's natural possessions --- the assets you brought with you into the world, such as your body, your life, your various capacities and abilities. Included among the latter is the ability to speak.
I don't question or challenge your natural ability to speak. I ask what is your "natural right to freedom of speech"?
I just gave you that answer. A "right" is pseudo-property we impute to people to denote the relationship between a person and something he has acquired righteously, i.e., without inflicting loss or injury on another moral agent. Since you acquired your power to speak naturally and therefore righteously, you have a "natural" right to do so. Natural rights are simply rights to natural possessions, all of which are acquired righteously.
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021