The Ethical Dilemma of Torture in Interrogation

827 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Morality of torture

Ethics It is morally and ethically unjustifiable to resort to torture, no matter what the scenario might be. In this case, if you are not getting reliable information while interrogating the prisoner; then you are most likely not going to get reliable information while torturing the prisoner. The prisoner is most likely going to give you information that you want to hear, so you will stop with the torture. The decision to not torture the prisoner might leave thousands of lives at stake if he still refuses to give reliable information during interrogation. Then again, if you torture the prisoner and he gives us unreliable information, thousands of people are still going to die. Immanuel Kant said that we should never treat other human beings …show more content…

If we torture just one prisoner for information on the next terrorist attack, then we could save thousands of lives. One life vs a thousand lives, more good vs less harm. We torture one terrorist to save a thousand lives, so we are doing the most good with the least amount of harm in the views of Utilitarianism. Potential consequences of this could be the possibility that we do not stop with torturing just one prisoner, but we torture that prisoner’s family or multiple other prisoners in our blind approach to getting the information we want. This would mean that we would be doing more harm and less good, and go against the views of the Utilitarian Approach. In the case of the Virtue Approach, which of the options between torturing the prisoner or not will lead you to act as the sort of person you want to be? This would lead to you to not torture the prisoner, because it could destroy your moral character if you do choose to torture the prisoner. It is morally unacceptable to torture a human being according to a virtuous person, so if you act in accord to a virtuous person you would share the same view. Potential consequences of this could be that what you do could be lawfully right, but you refuse to do it because it is virtuously wrong in your

Show More
Related

  • Zimbardo's Prison Experiment, And The Stanford Prisoner Experiment

    936 Words  | 2 Pages

    How would you act if you were locked up in a concentration camp and the guards made you suffer? If I were in there, I would listen to the guards because I want less suffered. In addition, I would not try to stand out in the crowed to receive punishment by the guards. In the Movie, The Stanford Prison Experiment, students were split to be two group, guards and prisoner. In the oppressive environment and authority to the guards, the guards were out of control, and they kept on punish prisoner until they broke down. The prisoners were treated as less than human, and they won’t get what they need. Furthermore, these guards will act more aggressive every day to try to force the prisoner to conform. In the film The Stanford Prisoner Experiment, the guards become immoral because they got

    Read More

  • Utilitarian Argument For Torture In Ticking-Bomb Ethical Essay

    826 Words  | 2 Pages

    First, the ticking-bomb scenarios are cases in which torturing the terrorist will save many innocent lives at the cost of non-lethal suffering to one individual. Torturing the terrorist would thus produce the most happiness/well-being. This approach has great strengths but also creates complex questions: is torture still the lesser evil if it only saves one person? Is it morally right to torture a person’s children to extract a confession? Is it morally right to torture ninety-nine people in an attempt to save one-hundred others? In theory this type of thinking can justify extreme inhumanity as long as it is calculated as the lesser evil. Secondly, one ought to do what produces the most happiness/well-being. Despite the wider case against torture, a person confronted with the immediate choices in the ‘ticking bomb’ case is unlikely to take these issues into account; ‘interrogators will still use coercion because in some cases they will deem it worth the consequence. Few people would be unable to see a moral basis for torture if it was carried out in a reasonably clear ‘ticking bomb’ case and if the intention of the torturer was to ‘do the right thing.’ The difficulties of the immediate choice between carrying out torture and allowing deaths make it difficult to morally condemn the unfortunate person charged with deciding. Therefore, one ought to torture terrorists in such scenarios. The only pragmatic concern would be that torture does not

    Read More

  • Analysis of Michael Levin´s Article The Case of Torture

    856 Words  | 2 Pages

    Michael Levin's article on "The Case for Torture." is an article which mainly discusess the use

    Read More

  • Pouring Salt on the Wound

    1326 Words  | 3 Pages

    In order to assess the morality of torture, one needs to define it. According to the Tokyo Declaration of 1975 torture is “the deliberate, systematic, or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons acting alone or on the orders of any authority, to force another person to yield information, to make a confession or for any other reason.” This definition’s generality severely limits harmless interrogations by police. The United Nations changed the definition to include severe physical suffering, deliberate intentions, and also added that the action cannot be part of a lawful sanction. The US later revised the definition “to include only the most extreme pain” in 200...

    Read More

  • Torture And Torture In 1984

    1475 Words  | 3 Pages

    Some believe that even in the most dire of situations, the act of torturing a prisoner to obtain information is not the most effective or efficient way to glean accurate information of a threat or terrorist group; experts have said that it is actually a very inefficient way to go about this and even that it is only on rare occasions that this results in useful, accurate information. However, there are also those who believe the exact opposite; that the only way to get information from a terrorist, or someone believed to be involved in terrorist activity, is to mentally break them down until they have suffered enough to surrender any information they might know or to the point where they just say whatever is necessary for the “interrogation” to stop, as in

    Read More

  • Why Torture is Morally Wrong

    2139 Words  | 5 Pages

    Now, let’s say you do choose to torture this man, not only are the people directly in this situation going to be affected, but also the rest of the nation. We need to ask ourselves, what is going to be the true outcome? This includes thinking about how the enemy is going to react and how the nation is going to react. Torturing this man shames our nation as a whole, scars our repu...

    Read More

  • Is Torture Ever Acceptable?

    867 Words  | 2 Pages

    From a moral standpoint, torture is wrong and unacceptable. Many religious people are against this act of violence because they see it as a violation of the dignity of a human being. Humans have the right to not have intentional harm upon themselves from others. The ban on torture furthermore supports this certain right. Not only does torture violate people’s rights, but they also violate the demands of justice. In the past, many of our nation’s people have been tortured and we have had a problem with it; but when it’s not you the one that is being tortured, it seems to be fine. Have you heard of the golden rule, “Treat others only as you consent to being treated in the same situation? (7)” This applies very well to this problem.

    Read More

  • The Case For Torture, by Michael Levin

    1173 Words  | 3 Pages

    If one is willing to harm thousands of people without the thought of repercussions of his or her actions, they have extraordinarily little care for their own lives and in turn would die before retracting their beliefs. So yes, the threat of someone harming thousands of people will always remain, but torture may not be the answer to that predicament. Works Cited Levin, Michael. A. “The Case for Torture.” Newsweek 7 June, 1982: n.pag.

    Read More

  • Mill's Utilitarianism

    1327 Words  | 3 Pages

    Quantitative utilitarians would weigh the pleasure and pain which would be caused by the bomb exploding against the pleasure and pain that would be caused by torturing the terrorist. Then, the amounts would be summed and compared. The problem with this method is that it is impossible to know beforehand how much pain would be caused by the bomb exploding or how much pain would be caused by the torture. Utilitarianism offers no practical way to make the interpersonal comparison of utility necessary to compare the pains.

    Read More

  • Ethical Ethics Of Torture

    1033 Words  | 3 Pages

    The use of torture has always been a hot topic of moral and ethical discussion. Typically, the discussion is not about whether or not torture is good, but rather if there is ever a morally acceptable situation in which torture should be allowed to occur. Does a criminal’s deeds strip him of basic human rights and make it morally okay for him to be physically and mentally abused? Do certain situations such as war make torture acceptable? It is generally agreed upon that torture is a terrible violation of a person and their rights; the common thread among moral questions such as these is if there are any times when torture could be considered morally acceptable. In order to analyze this moral dilemma, an ethical system is commonly used as a

    Read More

  • Is Torture Justified?: Is Torture Justified?

    1042 Words  | 3 Pages

    The issue of torture is nothing new. It was done in the past and it’s done now in the 21st century. Without saying one side is right and the other side is wrong, let us discuss the part that we agree on and find common ground. We as Americans want to protect Americans from harms. So how do we prevent that from happening without torturing? It is impossible to get answer without some sort of questioning and intimidation techniques, since we know captured prisoners during war are not easily going to give up information. We know the enemy we face doesn’t follow the Geneva Convention or any law that pertains to war, so does that mean we shouldn’t also follow the Geneva Convention also, which prohibits torture? Of course not, because we want to be example for the world. Republicans argue that we have to do whatever is necessary to keep Americans safe, and Democrats argue it goes against our values and makes us look bad. We as Americans, as leader of the free world we

    Read More

  • Ethical Ethics Of Torture

    1250 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this case of the use of torture in the interrogation of terrorists by the United States, it is easy to jump to the conclusion that the sacrifice of one person 's well-being to obtain information that could be used to save more than one life would be justifiable, but what happens when you complicate this issue? For example, the use of torture can cause strain on foreign alliances as well as further instigate the organization that the person being tortured belongs to. This can lead to a stronger terrorist organization that is more unified. As a result of this effect, we can put more lives in harm’s way. The information could also allow the United States to locate the terrorist organization and eliminate its members while expecting our own casualties. The utilitarian approach would deem torture as ethical if the total amount of casualties, regardless if they are from the U.S, the terrorist organization, or uninvolved third parties, is less than would be without the torture. Unfortunately, there is often not enough information at the time of interrogation to determine if the utilitarian approach is ethically

    Read More

  • Happiness Vs Consequential Happiness

    1079 Words  | 3 Pages

    (Turner) Let’s look at the first option, torturing the innocent daughter, through the lens of a utilitarian. The pro of this option is saving the lives of 1000 innocent people. The con is torturing 1 innocent person. It is quite obvious that the pro far outweighs the con for this option. For example, each one of the 1000 people would rather be tortured then to die. For the second option the pro is 1 person not being tortured and the con is 1000 people dying. Being the opposite of the first option, it is clear that the con far outweighs the pro. This problem is very straightforward for a true utilitarian, because they do not take in consideration who is doing the harm. The fact that you are directly hurting someone is seen as no different than indirectly harming someone. Therefore the indirect effect on 1000 people far outweighs the direct effect on 1 person. Another reason this problem is simple for a utilitarian, is that there are only two possible options. Most moral problems have many possible choices, and the utilitarian must decide which maximizes happiness, not just which is greater. Since we are 100% certain that these are the only two options, the greater is the

    Read More

  • Mad Bomber Case Study

    1475 Words  | 3 Pages

    By trying to force this man to talk without his lawyer present, you are taking away his fifth amendment rights. By torturing him, you are giving him punishment that is definitely cruel and unusual. By punishing his crime now without warrant, judge, or jury, you take away his right to due process. All people are entitled to these rights, even criminals of the harshest crime. By taking them away, you are giving him special treatment, even if that special treatment is not favorable.

    Read More

  • The Convention Against Torture

    1107 Words  | 3 Pages

    Around the world and around the clock, human rights violations seem to never cease. In particular, torture violations are still rampant all over the world. One regime, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, establishes a strong elaboration of norms against torture. Despite its efforts, many countries still outright reject its policies against torture while other countries openly accept them, but surreptitiously still violate them. The US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia all have failed to end torture despite accepting the provisions of the Convention.

    Read More

More about The Ethical Dilemma of Torture in Interrogation

Open Document