camera at the center of rationality
I recently ran into Edna Ullmann-Margalit’s interesting essay about an episode where a colleague installed a CCTV camera in the office kitchen at the Center for Rationality (@ Hebrew University). Apparently cleanliness was an issue in the common area so a senior colleague thought a camera would take care of things. As you might suspect, a vigorous discussion ensued. Lots of interesting issues get raised in the essay: norms, privacy and behavior, the commons, gender, etc.
Some of the emails about the camera are great:
The real discussion should be about why a bunch of intelligent, well educated, and probably well-meaning people in the center of rationality (no less!) cannot run their affairs without surveillance. I find it remarkable. [Jonathan, 5 Jul 2007, 20:46]
Altogether, I don’t understand how the matter of privacy applies to a common kitchen. What would one want to do there ‘privately?’ [Isaac, 4 July 2007, 00:19]
I see no reason for people to object to the camera in the kitchen, UNLESS THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE. And if they have something to hide, it should not be done in the common area. [Alex, 4 Jul 2007, 12:42]
The idea that the people who object to the camera have something to hide is so preposterous that it could only cross the mind of one who thinks everything in life is a simple strategic game. [Miri, 4 Jul 2007, 18:06]
Ullmann-Margalit was the director of the Rationality Center. She opposed the camera and had it removed a week later. Here’s a draft of the essay: “Regulation through Observation: The Curious Incident of the Camera in the Kitchen.”
(A side note: sadly Ullmann-Margalit passed away last year. She did some brilliant work on the emergence of norms.)
Only now saw this – the working paper was published here – http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2008.00047.x/full
teppo
September 2, 2011 at 6:31 pm
Having not read the paper, I will say that this is about as meta as it gets, since clean kitchens are one of the most classic examples of a commons. Having not read the paper, it probably says that in the paper.
Trey
September 2, 2011 at 7:35 pm
the URL for the paper is not pointing to the right place. you can try: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/2009/09_coll_quain.pdf to get a copy of what seems to be the same paper.
cceddie (@cceddie)
September 6, 2011 at 6:28 pm
Thanks.
(For some reason it adds the orgtheory url ahead of the link – will try to figure that out, immediate fixes didn’t seem to work. Haven’t had that problem in the past, I don’t think.)
teppo
September 6, 2011 at 7:23 pm
My comments–on collective action, privacy, and emotions–when the paper was given to a conference in 2008:
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~sfos0060/ullmanmargalitcomment.shtml
Michael Biggs
September 12, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Michael – excellent, thanks! Could you provide the link again? – can’t seem to pull it up.
OK, never mind – copying work but clicking didn’t for some reason.
teppo
September 12, 2011 at 3:12 pm