In the Netherlands, as in many other nations, the government has proposed the use of a contact-tracing app as a means of helping to contain the spread of the corona virus. The discussion about the use of such an app has mostly been framed in terms of a tradeoff between privacy and public health. This research statement presents an analysis of the Dutch public debate on Corona-apps by using the framework of Orders of Worth by Boltanski and Thévenot (1991). It argues that this framework can help us to move beyond the dichotomy of privacy vs. public health by recognizing a plurality of conceptions of the common good in the debate about contact-tracing apps. This statement presents six orders of worth present in the Dutch debate: civic, domestic, vitality, market, industrial and project, and argues that the identification of which common goods are at stake will contribute to discussions about the use of this technology from a standpoint with a richer ethical perspective.

在荷兰，与许多其他国家一样，政府已提议使用接触者追踪应用程序来帮助遏制冠状病毒的传播。关于使用此类应用程序的讨论主要是在隐私和公共卫生之间的权衡方面进行的。本研究声明通过使用 Boltanski 和 Thévenot (1991) 的 Orders of Worth 框架，对荷兰关于 Corona-apps 的公开辩论进行了分析。它认为，这个框架可以帮助我们超越隐私与公共卫生的二分法，通过在关于接触追踪应用程序的辩论中认识到多种共同利益的概念。该声明提出了荷兰辩论中存在的六个价值顺序：公民、国内、活力、市场、工业和项目，并认为，从更丰富的道德角度来看，确定哪些公共物品处于危险之中，将有助于讨论如何使用这项技术。