Michael Levin Torture Summary

537 Words2 Pages

Torture
The assumption by people that torture is not right is disputable. It is not morally right according to many. However, Levin argues that the belief is based on ignorance, as there are some situations where torture is unavoidable. The main idea presented by Michael Levin is torture and its admission to the people who are tortured. He argues that torturing is not meant to punish the victims, but rather to help solve the cases where a number of innocent persons’ lives are at stake. He gives an example where a terrorist wants to execute killings to innocent people for their own selfish gains. In such an instance, it is prudent for the malicious person to be stopped in time before the execution takes place. The only way to stop such is not by killing the person but by making that person speak out on how he plans to undertake the operation. For instance, a bomb may have been planted in an island bearing lives of people who are not aware, and the bomb’s location is not known. He argues that the only way to get the information is to torture the terrorist to lure him into confession. …show more content…

On the other hand, it is not right either to risk lives of innocent persons for what it is constitutional. The lives of people are more important than the constitution. On the other hand, the legal processes are too long to depend on. Considering an emergency where people have to die if action is not taken before hand and in time, it is very right to break such law to save the lives. The argument does not just stop at that but goes further to explain that the belief that torture is not right is outdated. We are living in an era where terrorists proclaim themselves on media. They brag about what they have done and what they are yet to do. Therefore, probability that an innocent person is subjected to torture is

Open Document