The Ethics of Torture

@memester,

All very commendable moral attitudes expressed but none have answered the question if you could save lives by torturing the aggressor in a certain circumstance would you? We could argue if it has worked or could work if you like but that does not answer the dilemma you might find yourself in.I see certain posters have confirmed they would not at all ,others it would not work, which avoids answering and others merely quote others opinions.Now come on lets be honest and answer the proposal.

---------- Post added at 05:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:53 AM ----------

memester;70133 wrote:

I did not. That mention of the legal system was an addition to the subject at hand - added because the issue of false information being used against people, relates, in a way.

However, you did define the situation regarding torture, you see.

What I added afterward had nothing to do with torture or saving lives...it's about making people who act, bear responsibility for their actions...get it ?

The secret stuff sounds terribly interesting....but not of any use for discussion here, as it's so secret that you can't talk about it, and nobody else in the world has ever talked about it in public and survived, either. And if they did talk about it, their words were expunged from history as well. Is that it ? :sarcastic:

BTW..whose "secrets" are they , these "their" that you talk about ?

Not the US military...why waterboard when you can do "The Secret" to them ?

Is it having Oprah sit on them ? Watch episodes ?

It may not be relevant to you but it might if you had need to if you found yourself in a moral dilemma.Americans i believe are not privy to these methods,water boarding is crude in comparison.Don't dilute the debate by arguing over our form of debate, answer the fictitious dilemma.What would you do if you could save a thousand lives by torturing one person.I dont think this is judgement on individuals morals but a pragmatic answer to a dilemma many might find themselves in.

@hue-man,

"All very commendable moral attitudes expressed but none have answered the question if you could save lives by torturing the aggressor in a certain circumstance would you? We could argue if it has worked or could work if you like but that does not answer the dilemma you might find yourself in.I see certain posters have confirmed they would not at all ,others it would not work, which avoids answering and others merely quote others opinions.Now come on lets be honest and answer the proposal.".....xris

i think most people were addressing the OP which asked if torture could be justified according to utilitarianism or condemned within the same framework.

however, i believe i did answer the question you proposed and i will say it again. i personally would not commit or condone torture under any circumstances that have so far been mentioned including yours. i am open to the possibility that some condition may exist that could justify it but so far i have not been able to imagine any.

@salima,

salima;70293 wrote:

"All very commendable moral attitudes expressed but none have answered the question if you could save lives by torturing the aggressor in a certain circumstance would you? We could argue if it has worked or could work if you like but that does not answer the dilemma you might find yourself in.I see certain posters have confirmed they would not at all ,others it would not work, which avoids answering and others merely quote others opinions.Now come on lets be honest and answer the proposal.".....xris

i think most people were addressing the OP which asked if torture could be justified according to utilitarianism or condemned within the same framework.

however, i believe i did answer the question you proposed and i will say it again. i personally would not commit or condone torture under any circumstances that have so far been mentioned including yours. i am open to the possibility that some condition may exist that could justify it but so far i have not been able to imagine any.

Salima,im not asking you to imagine, im giving you an example of circumstance that could occur.You did answer originally but now you put a proviso on the answer.I could do the same if i wished to avoid the moral issue.In my past i have known it used to good use even though the moral issues where questionable and the reasons for it being used was not acceptable.The issue is, if you think or believe you would save lives by torture would you do it?

@hue-man,

i didnt intend any proviso.
how is this for an answer?

NO

@salima,

salima;70296 wrote:

i didnt intend any proviso.
how is this for an answer?

NO

That's fine Salima but its an answer without logical reasoning.I wish i could be so certain of my intentions given the reality of the proposed situation.Would you ask this murderer to give you the locality of the bomb? you would not pressurise him or her in any way?

@xris,

xris;70289 wrote:

All very commendable moral attitudes expressed but none have answered the question if you could save lives by torturing the aggressor in a certain circumstance would you? We could argue if it has worked or could work if you like but that does not answer the dilemma you might find yourself in.I see certain posters have confirmed they would not at all ,others it would not work, which avoids answering and others merely quote others opinions.Now come on lets be honest and answer the proposal.

---------- Post added at 05:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:53 AM ----------

It may not be relevant to you but it might if you had need to if you found yourself in a moral dilemma.Americans i believe are not privy to these methods,water boarding is crude in comparison.Don't dilute the debate by arguing over our form of debate, answer the fictitious dilemma.What would you do if you could save a thousand lives by torturing one person.I dont think this is judgement on individuals morals but a pragmatic answer to a dilemma many might find themselves in.

Well, xris, I think I can make it even easier for you.
If my child were being held ransom and I could find no other route quickly, I would pry out the suspect's eyes with a spoon, if I thought it would work.

@xris,

xris;70306 wrote:

That's fine Salima but its an answer without logical reasoning.I wish i could be so certain of my intentions given the reality of the proposed situation.Would you ask this murderer to give you the locality of the bomb? you would not pressurise him or her in any way?

xris-
i believe i also did explain my reasoning. it is because i believe torture is an immoral act and i would not do it under the conditions you prescribed. do you want to know my reasoning for why it is an immoral act?

the reason i believe it should be illegal under all circumstances is that once it is legal it is apt to be used as well as abused, as i am sure you know has already been done. any law no matter how hard it tries to qualify the use of torture can be misinterpreted. and unfortunately human nature has a very dark side and there are those who will be more than happy to participate.

a society that condones the use of torture is going backwards in time as i see it. it is akin to slavery in my mind-simply unacceptable. it is assuming that some human beings are less than human and involves making a judgment as to who they are.

if you are asking me for alternatives as to how to get information out of someone, what happened to truth serum? doesnt that work any more? it would be possible to try psychology in a good sense, having someone who is adept at understanding the aberrant human mind try to figure out what is the pattern of thinking that makes the person wish to accomplish the murder of thousands of people and then seek a way to convince him that he is wrong using his own arguments, presented to him at his own level of understanding and mental capacity. i am sure someone else could come up with other alternatives as well.

and xris, if you want to know how really strong my conviction is, i believe even if it were to save the life of someone i loved, i am 99% certain that i still would not stoop to using torture either by my own hand or by giving approval or permission to someone else to do it for me. it would be arrogant of me to say i could be sure i know what i would do under those circumstances; there are some things we do not know about ourselves until we are actually called upon to act. but i am just about sure.

does that help any?

@salima,

Salima im not asking for torture to become a legal tool or it to be used as weapon to suppress.I'm asking you how far you would go to secure a million lives if one person held the secret to their survival.A truth serum what if he did not like injections and opposed its use?what about a slap around his face or the threat of violence. A million souls would die because you would not inflict a measured amount of violence on one person?
Lets say you let him kill his victims what punishment should we impose on one man for killing a million souls?

---------- Post added at 10:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:17 AM ----------

memester;70325 wrote:

Well, xris, I think I can make it even easier for you.
If my child were being held ransom and I could find no other route quickly, I would pry out the suspect's eyes with a spoon, if I thought it would work.

The trouble is you also become a victim,no one with a moral attitude survives untouched by the necessity to harm.The trouble with life is that we dont always write the script.I'm like you with a given motive i would choose to go against my moral views for the greater good.

@xris,

xris;70333 wrote:

Salima im not asking for torture to become a legal tool or it to be used as weapon to suppress.I'm asking you how far you would go to secure a million lives if one person held the secret to their survival.A truth serum what if he did not like injections and opposed its use?what about a slap around his face or the threat of violence. A million souls would die because you would not inflict a measured amount of violence on one person?
Lets say you let him kill his victims what punishment should we impose on one man for killing a million souls?

---------- Post added at 10:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:17 AM ----------

The trouble is you also become a victim,no one with a moral attitude survives untouched by the necessity to harm.The trouble with life is that we dont always write the script.I'm like you with a given motive i would choose to go against my moral views for the greater good.

xris,
i dont have a problem with forcefully administering truth serum against his will, though it can be argued that is degradation, humiliation, assault, a form of torture and any number of things. we didnt exactly define what is the meaning of torture either when we got into this.

and the number of lives somehow doesnt compute with me. when i think of the term 'greater good' i dont mean by the numbers. it is the same issue with punishment-to kill one person or a million at once... is what it is. the number of occasions a person has commited such acts would hold more weight with me than the number of people. there is no price for a human life, so how can you multiply something that is priceless by a million? it doesnt compute.

i happen to be against capital punishment and in fact i am against punishment altogether. rehabilitation would be a better plan in my utopia. you must understand i am an idealist and i know most of the things i believe in wont work, but that doesnt stop me from believing they are the most reasonable or ethical thing to do.

and as you said, there are times when i would say it is moral to do an immoral act, that is the point i was trying to get across when you said i was adding provisos. but here, as you requested, i am answering your question, i.e. would i refuse to torture someone even if i knew it meant a million people (it used to be a lot less when you first asked, but it is all the same thing to me) would die.

@xris,

xris;70333 wrote:

no one with a moral attitude survives untouched by the necessity to harm.The trouble with life is that we dont always write the script.I'm like you with a given motive i would choose to go against my moral views for the greater good.

True; to consider the killing of vermin such as oral bacteria, or roaches or rats, we aren't talking ethics, were talking sanitation and hygeine. That in itself is demonstration of our bind.
Even a monk dedicated to non-violence, if there is the neccessity of removing pests from the worship place, and he decides to remove each insect by hand and release it in a nice spot, would eventually become angry and resentful at the little buggers multiplying faster than he can find them. Or at least he would find the necessity to treat them with with less and less respect; finding any old location to dump them, grabbing them quick as he can, carrying bunches at a time, crowded together...

Better to grit your teeth, say your prayers, and do it on the spot at one go, and return to being a nice buddhakin.
It can be looked at as a life lesson; that living necessitates misery, and it's better to not repeat it endlessly.

Living Mummies |
But some forget that moderation - The Middle Way - is the basic lesson !

@memester,

Salima im against capital punishment as i think it an easy option and mistakes do happen.I think society is degraded by the act.
We did not discuss what is torture but I would decide what is appropriate by my own morals in those circumstances.I could not ever consider boiling someone alive for any ends but psychological or any pain that did not involve permanent damage, i would consider to save lives.
I would not consider it if lives where not in imminent danger or for security measures as they are counter productive.You do consider certain measures but you would stop sooner than me,its down to degrees of disagreement not the principle.

@xris,

That might be, but there is another question: isn't there a difference between what I can potentially be compelled to do, and what I should aim for ?

Philosophy Forum

The Ethics of Torture

Quick Links

My Account

able2know