Blackmail Paradox

| | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (1)

Eugene Volokh presents a paradox about blackmail in response to a letter someone sent a senator who was planning to vote for Alito that threatened to reveal that the senator was gay unless he voted no, a pretty despicable act (whether the senator is gay or not). The paradox is as follows.

1. Free speech rights allow me to publish embarassing information about someone (in many cases).
2. There's nothing immoral or illegal about asking for money in exchange for a service (in most cases).
3. But when 1 and 2 are combined, we call it blackmail and make it illegal. How can it be that the combination of two legal acts could make something illegal?

As I said in the comments on Eugene's post, there is a moral issue that comes in once you combine the two issues. That issue is what we call coercion. It's not coercion to make an offer to do something positive for someone if they do something for you. If they turn you down then you are no worse off. If it's wrong, it would have to be on other grounds. But if someone threatens you with a negative consequence if you don't do something for them, you are indeed worse off if you turn them down. That undermines the consent of your doing the action and thus puts it in a category with coercion. It's not coercion in the sense of being forced to do something with absolutely no choice, but it's like being forced to choose between a negative consequence and doing the unawanted action. That's indeed what happens when someone puts a gun to your head, so it's coercion in that exact sense. You can risk taking the bullet and not do what they ask, but it's a huge risk. The greater the risk, the greater the coercion.

As a non-lawyer, I can't comment on the legal issues, but that's the moral issue that makes combining 1 and 2 immoral while 1 alone or 2 alone is at least less immoral or even not immoral (depending on the circumstances, perhaps). These are the sorts of moral issues that laws often rely on. So I don't know if it's really counts as a paradox, or at least if it does then it's one that's easily solved.

1 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Blackmail Paradox.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://movabletype.ektopos.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/2274

The medieval monk and scholar Caesarius of Heisterbach tells of hearing a lay brother praying to Jesus: �Lord,� the man declared, �if Thou free me not from this temptation I will complain of Thee to Thy mother.� Attempting to blackmail... Read More

3 Comments

The paradox is overblown. The essence and substance of constitutional representation excludes in principle cash payments in quid pro quo. Likewise with teaching and sexual relations in (or out of) marriage. The question to ask in paradoxes is, What distinctions must we introduce? Paradoxes can, by their nature, be only apparent, never real. Making the proper distinctions will reveal the illusion.

Cash payments to teachers and representatives are under the auspices of worker qua moneymaker, not qua teacher or rep, per se. Cash payments to one's wife are to woman qua covenant partner, not qua supplier of contractual services.

It is interesting that this would be regarded as paradoxical. Structurally it seems he's saying A is permissible, B is permissible, how odd that (A&B) is not? But it isn't odd at all. The inference from A is permissible, B is permissible, thus (A&B) is permissible is analagous to the common modal fallacy A is possible, B is possible, thus (A&B) is possible (let A be the Steelers win, B be the Seahawks win).

Yes, I think that's what I was saying except that I was showing the invalidity by example and you're showing it by the formal structure (though your example at the end is by example, of course, just by a much simpler example than the ones I had in mind).

Leave a comment

Contact

    The Parablemen are: , , and .

Archives

Archives

Books I'm Reading

Fiction I've Finished Recently

Non-Fiction I've Finished Recently

Books I've Been Referring To

I've Been Listening To

Games I've Been Playing

Other Stuff

    jolly_good_blogger

    thinking blogger
    thinking blogger

    Dr. Seuss Pro

    Search or read the Bible


    Example: John 1 or love one another (ESV)





  • Link Policy
Powered by Movable Type 5.04