Michael Levin's The Case for Torture

In “The Case for Torture,” Michael Levin presents logical fallacies that originate at the authors desire to relate the importance of his message. Though his specific argument is a very plausible solution to a taboo problem, the manner in which he presents it has some fallacies that cause it to be unsupported
Levin argues that torture should be used on terrorist in order to save people from terrorism. He further implies that this is the morally correct thing to do, because it ensures the good of the people. While his argument would be plausible in a utilitarian society, it is formidable within the cultural ideals of America as democratic societies typically tend to obscure techniques that violate natural rights and or ethics. Hence, Levin works excessively in order to convince his audience of his position. He uses three extreme, hypothetical examples in which torture may be necessary. One being a situation with a terrorist on Manhattan Island plotting to detonate a bomb on July fourth, another being a bomber on a jet plane wanting his demands to be met, and the last, a polled scenario where a terrorist group kidnapped newborn infants from a hospital. He also states that torture should not be punishment for an attack, but rather means of preventing one from happening. He then states that there must be “clear guilt” in order for someone to torture for these purposes. Finally, he addresses that the implications that accepting torture into western culture will emit to the rest of the world are nonexistent and the democracy will not lose its way.
Levin attempts to persuade the reader that torture is the only way to ensure justice with the use of multiple fallacies in a single statement that include: the either-or-fallacy, a contradicti...

... middle of paper ...

... support government action and by presenting the liberal side of this argument one also suggests that torture should be extended to government- which is the overall argument. In this case, Levin uses prejudice language in order to convey the overall argument of the essay.
In summation, the essay has implications that are fallible and questionable because they are only sound in hypothetical evidence and theory. Moreover the argument appeals greatly to emotion to achieve its purpose so much that persuasion is more out of fear than actual convincement. The fallacies found are not to say that the argument is not absent of good intentions, just to say that it is conveyed in a manner so improper that it cannot be heard by its own merits.

Works Cited
Levin, Micheal. "Michael Levin: The Case for Torture." Michael Levin: The Case for Torture. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.