Jeff Jacoby’s column “Sterling’s words vulgar, but private” (Op-ed, April 30) touched upon the essence of society’s dilemma, pitting individual privacy in the 21st century against the public’s appetite for “private thoughts.”
For ages, people have been trying to probe the private thoughts of others, whether they be the betrothed wondering if their intended truly loves them, or the police dancing around the concept of Miranda v. Arizona in an attempt to exact a confession from the private thoughts of the accused.
Jacoby writes, “Private lives and private thoughts aren’t supposed to be everyone’s business.” I agree.
Our private thoughts are not a reality show for anyone to tune into, but rather a sanctuary into which human beings can retreat to sort things out and decide for themselves what stays in and what goes out.
Think of the damage the world would suffer without the buffer zone of impenetrable private thoughts. World diplomacy would fail, marriages and relationships would be torn asunder, and mankind would not evolve but devolve.
Do we really want to know the whole truth and nothing but the truth?