Digital Skepticism and Legal Philosophy

Authors: Á. L. Bendes

Abstract:

A cautious and questioning approach to the growing impact of digital technologies on society—often referred to as digital skepticism—raises complex issues when explored through the lens of legal philosophy. This paper aims to explore the intersection of digital skepticism and legal philosophy, emphasizing the implications for justice, rights, and the rule of law in the digital age. Digital skepticism arises from concerns about privacy, security, and the ethical implications of digital technology. It questions the extent to which digital advancements enhance or undermine fundamental human values. Legal philosophy, which interrogates the foundations and purposes of law, provides a framework for examining these concerns critically. One key area where digital skepticism and legal philosophy intersect is in the realm of privacy. Digital technologies, particularly data collection and surveillance mechanisms, pose substantial threats to individual privacy. Legal philosophers must grapple with questions about the limits of state power and the protection of personal autonomy. They must consider how traditional legal principles, such as the right to privacy, can be adapted or reinterpreted in light of emerging technological realities. Security is another critical concern. Digital skepticism highlights vulnerabilities in cybersecurity and the potential for malicious activities, such as hacking and cybercrime, to disrupt legal systems and societal order. Legal philosophy must address how laws can evolve to protect against these emerging forms of threats while balancing security with civil liberties. Ethics plays a central role in this discourse. Digital technologies raise ethical dilemmas, such as the development and use of artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms that may perpetuate biases or make decisions without human oversight. Legal philosophers must evaluate the moral responsibilities of those who design and implement these technologies and consider the implications for justice and fairness. Furthermore, digital skepticism prompts a reevaluation of the concept of the rule of law. In an increasingly digital world, maintaining transparency, accountability, and fairness becomes more complex. Legal philosophers must explore how legal frameworks can ensure that digital technologies serve the public good and do not entrench power imbalances or erode democratic principles. Finally, the intersection of digital skepticism and legal philosophy has practical implications for policy-making. Legal scholars and practitioners must work collaboratively to develop regulations and guidelines that address the challenges posed by digital technology. This includes crafting laws that protect individual rights, ensure security, and promote ethical standards in technology development and deployment. In conclusion, digital skepticism provides a crucial lens for examining the impact of digital technology on law and society. A legal philosophical approach offers valuable insights into how legal systems can adapt to protect fundamental values in the digital age. By addressing privacy, security, ethics, and the rule of law, legal philosophers can help shape a future where digital advancements enhance, rather than undermine, justice and human dignity.

Keywords: Data privacy, cybersecurity, digital transformation, ethical considerations, regulatory compliance.

References:

[1] "Legal Philosophy and Emerging Threats: Balancing Security with Civil Liberties" https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/sats-2021-0008/html?lang=en (2024.01.02.)
[2] "Publication Ethics" https://ojs.elte.hu/digitalisbolcseszet/about/publication-ethics (2024.01.02.)
[3] "AI and Human Rights: Ethical Frameworks in Technological Societies" https://www.coe.int/en/web/artificial-intelligence/ai-and-human-rights (2024.01.02.)
[4] Ponnusamy, V. et al. (2024). Modern Advancements in Surveillance Systems and Technologies. IGI Global. https://www.igi-global.com/book/modern-advancements-surveillance-systems-technologies/346386 (2025.05.11.)
[5] Bradford, A. (2023). Digital Empires: The Global Battle to Regulate Technology. pp. 78-92, 103-115.
[6] Jacko, J.A. (Ed.). (2012). Human Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies, and Emerging Applications. 3rd Edition. CRC Press. pp. 201-220, 345-360.
[7] Topi, H. and Tucker, A. (Eds.). (2014). Computing Handbook: Information Systems and Information Technology. 3rd Edition. Chapman and Hall/CRC. pp. 12-18
[8] Spitzer, C.R., Ferrell, U., and Ferrell, T. (Eds.). (2014). Digital Avionics Handbook. 3rd Edition. CRC Press. pp. 156-170
[9] "Why is Cyber Security So Important to the Legal Sector" https://insights.integrity360.com/why-is-cyber-security-so-important-to-the-legal-sector (2025.01.05.)
[10] "Cyber Security for Law Firms" https://dyedurham.ca/cyber-security-for-law-firms/ (2025.01.05.)
[11] "Cyber Security in the Legal Sector: Risks, Impact, and Action" https://www.essentialtech.com.au/blog/cyber-security-in-the-legal-sector-risks-impact-and-action (2025.01.05.)
[12] "Legal Aspects of Cybersecurity" https://jrnl.nau.edu.ua/index.php/UV/article/view/18813 (2025.01.05.)
[13] "Securing Privacy and Civil Liberties in the Age of Cybersecurity Reform" https://www.biometricupdate.com/202411/securing-privacy-and-civil-liberties-in-the-age-of-cybersecurity-reform (2025.01.05.)
[14] "Cybersecurity and the Rule of Law" https://www.coe.int/en/web/cybercrime/cybersecurity-rule-of-law (2025.01.05.)
[15] "Mesterséges intelligencia az etikai kihívások és dilemmák tükrében" https://stylersgroup.hu/mesterseges-intelligencia-az-etikai-kihivasok-es-dilemmak-tukreben/ (2025.01.21.)
[16] "Kifizetődik a mesterséges intelligencia etikus alkalmazása" https://fintechzone.hu/kifizetodik-a-mesterseges-intelligencia-etikus-alkalmazasa/ (2025.01.21.)
[17] Dr. Petrányi Dóra; Cím: "A mesterséges intelligencia szabályozásának etikai kérdései" https://unesco.hu/data/articles/107/1071/article-107184/A_mesterseges_intelligencia_szabalyozasanak_etikai_kerdesei_DORA_PETRANYI_20201021.pdf (2025.01.21.)
[18] "Megbízható mesterséges intelligenciára vonatkozó etikai iránymutatás"; 2019.11.06..https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COMMITTEES/JURI/DV/2019/11-06/Ethics-guidelines-AI_HU.pdf (2025.01.21.)
[19] Dr. Petrányi Dóra; Cím: "A mesterséges intelligencia szabályozásának etikai kérdései"; Közlés dátuma: 2020.10.21. https://unesco.hu/data/articles/107/1071/article-107184/A_mesterseges_intelligencia_szabalyozasanak_etikai_kerdesei_DORA_PETRANYI_20201021.pdf (2025.01.21.)
[20] "Responsible AI Development – OECD Principles" https://oecd.ai/en/dashboards/ai-principles/P1 (2025.01.21.)
[21] "AI and Ethics in Europe" https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2020/artificial-intelligence-and-fundamental-rights (2025.01.21.)
[22] "Artificial Intelligence and Cultural Rights" https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2021/10/artificial-intelligence-and-cultural-rights (2025.01.21.)
[23] Négyesi Imre; Cím: "A mesterséges intelligencia társadalmi és etikai kérdései"; 2023.01.22. https://real.mtak.hu/173214/1/02_Negyesi_Imre_6-18.pdf (2025.01.21.)
[24] "Artificial Intelligence 2024: Hungary - Trends and Developments" 2024. https://practiceguides.chambers.com/practice-guides/artificial-intelligence-2024/hungary/trends-and-developments (2025.01.21.)
[25] "The digital defence line: Hungary adopts comprehensive cybersecurity law" 2025. https://www.schoenherr.eu/content/the-digital-defence-line-hungary-adopts-comprehensive-cybersecurity-law (2025.01.21.)
[26] "Data protection and cybersecurity laws in Hungary | CMS Expert Guide" https://cms.law/en/int/expert-guides/cms-expert-guide-to-data-protection-and-cyber-security-laws/hungary (2025.01.21.)
[27] "Supporting the digital transformation of higher education in Hungary"https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2021/11/supporting-the-digital-transformation-of-higher-education-in-hungary_b2e004f7/d30ab43f-en.pdf (2025.01.21.)
[28]
[Kalman, J. (1986). Jerome Frank and the Legacy of Legal Realism. The Yale Law Journal, 86(3), 370–391. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/1410136 (2024.05.11.)