Philip Heymann and Alan Dershowitz, both professors at the prestigious Harvard University, have developed different theories about the torture as a tool for extorting information from terrorists in their works “Torture Should Not Be Authorized.” and “Yes, It Should Be ‘On the Books’” respectively . Although their opinions intersect at many points, they are somewhat different.…
Torture Science has proven that the human mind has a breaking point. A certain amount of physical infliction on the body or mental strain will cause one to give in. The boiling point of a person is tipped by torture. Torture is a cruel war tactic. Torture breaks down the subject to extract information, punish, revenge, or to simply instill fear (Woodard).…
At some point everyone has heard of torture. It could have been in a movie or on the news, but they have heard of it. In this day and age, people would like to have believed it was all behind us in the past. Then 9/11 happened, everyone’s lives were changed with one simple act of cruelty. Before 9/11 hit the U.S. in a wave of pain, panic, and anger, our viewpoints on torture would probably have been less likely that it should be allowed. The decision to torture people who are suspected of being part of terrorist groups has always been decided by the government, for the simple reason that it is required to keep us safe from harm. Some people believe that torture is cruel, unsightly and just inhumane. On the other hand there are people who see it the same way but also believe it could be necessary in extreme circumstances. We’re going to look at two different points of torture: When it is acceptable and when it is not acceptable.…
References: Greenberg, K. J. (2005). Torture Debate in America, The. New York: Cambridge University Press.…
Torture is a concept that Americans attempt to avoid. If a criminal possesses the opportunity to harm innocent lives, the delinquent should be stopped. The idea presides in Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture”; Levin attempts to portray a point that the act of torturing terrorists in order to save innocent lives is justifiable. Throughout the article, Levin fabricates situations to present his argument that torture is not a bad idea. He voices that torture is not established to punish criminals, but instead it is established to hinder future malicious events from occurring. Although the United States government deems torture unconstitutional, Levin validates torture being acceptable through the utilization of the rhetorical appeals pathos and ethos.…
To most, torture is seen as action with a single definition that defines it, but in fact there are different types of torture that Henry Shue discusses in one of his articles. According to Shue there are rare conditions under which torture could be morally justified, but he does not endorse neither the interrogational torture not the terroristic torture. Although Shue agrees with illegality and morally wrongness of torture, he explains how one may go about defending torture and how it could possibly be morally justified.…
When it comes to the topic of torture, most of us will readily agree that torturing someone in order to get information is not the answer. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of how guilty a person is, and what should be done in the case of a bombing. On the one hand, people argue that torture is unconstitutional and should not be practiced because it questions a person’s morality and what they are willing to do in order to get results. On the other hand, however, others argue that we should allow torture because it is more just than allowing thousands of innocents to die because we didn’t want to question a single person. I have mixed feelings on the topic. While I recognize that our actions may be for the greater good, we cannot allow ourselves to lose our morality because of it. I do not believe that a person should be tortured for information unless it is under specific circumstances. What I mean by this is that people should not torture someone unless that person is obviously guilty or it is…
There are many questions relating to the use of torture against any person whatsoever. As such, there are different perspectives on the ethics of its usage as well. While some believe that the use of torture becomes necessary at times, others believe that whatever the circumstances are, torture can never be justified. Some very pertinent issues related to the use of torture are, “Suppose a child has been kidnapped and a person has been suspected of committing the crime. Is it justifiable to torture that person in order to try to extract information from him about the child? Now suppose the person would not react at all if he is subjected to torture but there is a chance that he would divulge information if his child of the similar age as the…
There is an ongoing debate on whether torture should be used and if it is ever “ok”. There are many different points of view and both sides have very clear, convincing arguments on whether torture should be used as a way to obtain information. One side says that torture is not necessary even in extreme cases. The other side it should be used if it mandatory. Although these sound like a compromise they do have a few conflicting ideas. Even though both essays are trying to sway the reader to one side or another, it is the reader’s choice on how he or she feels on torture.…
Very brief summary: The article ‘Using torture is illegal and never justified’ argues against torture by mainly focusing on the fact that the information gained from torture is highly unreliable because the prisoner could be lying to get the torture to stop. Who makes the decisions is also called into question.…
Torture is never justified because it defies moral values of both humans and the United States. Humans have the obligation to “respect the honor and dignity of other human beings” (Fried), even if that respect and dignity is not returned. Once tactics such as torture are resorted to, which compromise the dignity of another human, the dignity of the person performing that act is also compromised (Fried). There are some things, such as torture, that should never be done simply because the right to “call ourselves decent human beings” depends on not doing them (Jacoby). If humans sink to the lowest level that is torture, the essential abilities to feel empathy, respect, and honor are lost, all core parts of humanity that separate man from all other animals. As a country, the United States also has distinct morals that hold it above resorting to torture.…
I think if the person is being tortured and has done something wrong, has endangered many innocent lives or is directly involved with a heinous crime, then it would be rational to use torture. However, I am a little skeptical if the person being tortured will become delusional and say something incorrect. Nevertheless, torture is never moral. Moreover, if people torture others purely for their own benefit, then that is treating humans as objects, “mere means" to an end (Bailey). Torture may be rational in some cases, however, it is never morally justifiable, as it is inflicting emotional and physical harm and treating humans as…
In his article entitled The Abolition of Torture, Sullivan responds to Krauthammer’s endorsement of torture “under strictly curtailed conditions” (1). Sullivan objects to this proposed allowance of torture under certain circumstances as “an abandonment and violation of America’s constitutional principles that uphold the country as a defender of human rights” (3), and argues in favour of the unconditional ban of torture, referring to it as "a terrible and monstrous…
Justifying the needs of implementing various methods of torture is strongly a recommended option to protecting America’s security and American citizens. While the debate of whether the use of torture is valid to protect the United States of America overall, supporters of the argument strongly argue that interrogating terrorists is only useful when various torture methods are involved. During one of the United States of America’s darkest periods in the nation’s history, the terrorists attack of September 11, 2001 rebooted the discussion of how various methods of torture are a justifiable means to not only place vengeance on the terrorists involved in the attacks on America’s soil. In the course of the aftermath of the horrific attacks of September 11, 2001, supporters of using various methods of torture during the interrogation process observed a central argument to prove their case. For example, if America’s security becomes unfortunately at risk of another terrorists attack, the nation could potentially protect Americans by implementing various methods of torture to only not question terrorists’ against their willpower.…
Torture has been regarded as one of the most serious human rights violations and has been banned by many human rights conventions including The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which was ratified by 129 countries including the United States. Furthermore the Geneva Conventions protects the rights of prisoners of war, which was constructed as a result of seeing the horrors of war. Still today, many find the need to argue that there are times when torture is just. This should not be a debate, considering that we already have laws that should put this battle to a rest.…