The Logical Structure of Intentional Anonymity

Michał Barcz, Jarek Gryz, Adam Wierzbicki

About author

Michał Barcz
University of Warsaw
Institute of Philosophy
Krakowskie Przedmieście 3
PL-00-927 Warszawa

E-mail: mchal@barcz.pl

About author

Jarek Gryz
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
York University
2049 Lassonde Building
4700 Keele Street Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3J 1P3

E-mail: jarek@cse.yorku.ca

About author

Adam Wierzbicki
University of Warsaw
Institute of Philosophy
Krakowskie Przedmieście 3
PL-00-927 Warszawa

E-mail: wiezzel@gmail.com

Abstract


It has been noticed by several authors that the colloquial understanding of anonymity as mere unknownness is insuffi cient. This common sense notion of anonymity does not recognize the role of the goal for which the anonymity is sought. Starting with the distinction between intentional and unintentional anonymity (which are usually taken to be the same) and the general concept of the non-coordinatability of traits, we offer a logical analysis of anonymity and identifi cation (understood as de-anonymization). In our enquiry, we focus on the intentional aspect of anonymity and develop a metaphor of an “anonymity game” between “perpetrator” and “detectiv

Full Text:

PDF


References


  1. Anscombe G.E. (1957), Intention, Blackwell, Oxford.
  2. Boer S.E., Lycan W.G. (1975). “Knowing Who,” Philosophical Studies 28 (5): 299–344.
  3. Davidson D. (1980), Actions and Events, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  4. Dennett D. (1982), “Beyond Belief,” [in:] Thought and Object, A. Woodfield (ed), Clarendon, Oxford.
  5. Donnellan K. (1966), “Reference and Definite Descriptions,” Philosophical Review 75: 281–304.
  6. Forsyth F. (1971), The Day of the Jackal, The Viking Press, New York.
  7. Frankfurt H. (1978), “The Problem of Action,” American Philosophical Quarterly 15: 157–162.
  8. Kaplan D. (1968), “Quantifying In,” Synthese 19 (1–2): 178–214.
  9. Matthews S. (2010), “Anonymity and the Social Self,” American Philosophical Quarterly 47: 351–363.
  10. Nissenbaum H. (1999), “The Meaning of Anonymity in an Information Age,” The Information Society 15: 141–144.
  11. Ohm P. (2010), “Broken Promises of Privacy: Responding to the Surprising Failure of Anonymization,” UCLA Law Review 57: 1701–1777.
  12. Ponesse J. (2013), “Navigating the Unknown: Towards a Positive Conception of Anonymity,” The Southern Journal of Philosophy 51 (3): 320–344.
  13. Quine W.V. (1956), “Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes,” Journal of Philosophy 53 (5): 177–187.
  14. Sajjad T. (2013), Transitional Justice in South Asia: A Study of Afghanistan and Nepal, Routledge, London and New York.
  15. Sosa E. (1970), “Propositional Attitudes De Dicto and De Re,” Journal of Philosophy 67 (21): 883-896.
  16. Wallace K.A. (1999), “Anonymity,” Ethics and Information Technology 1 (1): 23–35.

DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.13153/diam.1246

Article links:

Default URL: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/index.php/diametros/article/view/1246
English abstract URL: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/index.php/diametros/article/view/1246/en

Share:






All works are licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.