Rhetorical Analysis: The Case For Torture By Michael Levin

McCain states” The effects of most beatings heal. The memory of an execution will haunt someone for a very long time and damage his or her psyche in ways that may never heal”. (McCain). McCain also says” Many of many of my comrades were subjected to very cruel, very inhumane and degrading treatment and few of them unto death” (McCain). These two examples are affective because readers can only try to imagine what McCain and his solders went through. McCain is correct when he means it does not matter how many times someone can hit or torture a soldier, but seeing soldiers apart of the squadron getting executed will harm the mind forever. Levin’s essay has some examples that may create an emotional bond. Levin’s article states “I’m sorry, you’ll have to die in agony, we just couldn’t bring ourselves to …” (Levin). Levin has some guilt for the American soldiers because they were tortured. But Levin does not have feelings for captured enemies during war that they may suffer in order to get information. Levin has no personal experience with war or being tortured. If Levin had one personal experience with being captured prisoner than his point of view would change dramatically and

The end does not justify the means. This was the principal ethical theory of Immanuel Kant and made up his ‘Categorical Imperative’, a deontological argument which showcased how certain actions are fundamentally wrong, such as murder, lying or torture and can therefore, never be justified. Contrastingly a utilitarian would claim that the ends do in fact justify the means and would enact a focus on outcomes in deciding whether or not an action is morally permissible. In 2002 Jakob Von Metzler, a boy of just twelve years, was kidnapped and a police officer threatened the kidnapper, Magnus Gafgen, with torture in an attempt to find and save the child. Gafgen told the officer that he had killed the boy and then disclosed the location of the body. The kidnapper was prosecuted and sentenced to life imprisonment; however the officer ‘was also prosecuted and convicted of violating the kidnappers rights’ (Sandel, 2011). This presents an interesting moral dilemma, can torture ever be justified? And was the officer acting in a morally respectable way? In this essay I will answer these questions by analysing the arguments which justify or condemn his actions, from both the utilitarian and deontological perspectives.

Levin uses many hyperbolic situations that he uses to explain when and why torture would be acceptable. Within these hyperbolic situations he makes a very strong appeal to Pathos. In one of Levin’s hyperboles he says (1982) “Suppose a terrorist group kidnapped a newborn baby from a hospital.” By using this hyperbole he gets a lot of pathos within his argument and gains

Controversy is a wide discussion when it come to Liberals and Conservatives. Leonard Pitts is a controversial journalist for the Miami Herald. He is far left on the political spectrum. In “Don’t Lower the Bar on Education Standards,” “Torture Might Work, but That’s Not the Issue,” and “Real Men Keep Their Hands to Themselves,” Pitts shows a distinct writing style. He uses many rhetorical devices in his writings, and he uses many of the same devices in several passages. In “Torture Might Work,” Pitts discusses the immoral actions of torture, and in “Don’t Lower the Bar,” he talks about educational standards in the schooling system. He claims in order to fix the educational system, the standards cannot just be lowered. In “Real Men,” Pitts talks about the recent sexual abuse scandals that have come out, and how men should act with women. He lists some of the men who have been accused.

In medieval times, torture was used to punish criminals, deter crime, and gather information. There were many different types of tortures, most of which were brutal and painful. At the time, torture was deemed necessary to maintain order. Laws were harsh and torture was severe, but effective form of punishment. Despite its effectiveness, torture was often an unfair and extremely cruel punishment, and should have been eliminated in all forms. It is disturbing to learn how people were humiliated and maltreated, and how exquisitely brutal were the devices invented to subdue and discipline people.

Through the implementation of various rhetorical strategies, sensory imagery, and eloquent phrasing, Leah Hager Cohen effectively depicts the predominant idea that despite the stereotypical assumption that the audibly impaired cannot possibly be normal, her grandpa is, indeed, quite normal.

2016). Using this ethical framework to argue against torture, one needs to consider the violation of the terrorist’s rights. Utilitarians argue that under a scenario where thousands of people are in danger, the well-being of the larger community is more important than neglecting the rights of a single individual (Krauthammer 2005). The simple idea of taking away a person’s autonomy for the sake of others violates rights ethics. To comprehend the violation upon the victim’s rights, it is important to understand how torture feels, “Brian describes his body as having become an object… pain is the central reality; it dominates experience and expression (Wisnewski 2010, 81).” Some may argue the terrorist is responsible for putting himself in a situation where torture would be the only answer (Mayerfeld 2008). This argument undermines the terrorist’s perspective. Ultimately, the terrorists believe what they are doing is right and have concrete reasoning for their actions (Mayerfeld

War reporter Ernie Pyle in a eulogy about the aftermath of D-day titled "The Horrible Waste of War" (1944) explains and details the events of D-Day before the beach is cleaned up. In order to communicate the scene before him, Pyle uses a cataloging of images, irony, and imagery. Pyle seeks to write a lasting remembrance of the sacrifice of the soldiers on that beach. In remembering the soldiers, Pyle is cognizant of the interest his audience will have, an audience of Americans, family member, friends, and loved ones.

While analyzing “The Torture Myth” and “The Case for Torture”, it is very clear to see the type of rhetorical appeals used to persuade the audience. Anne Applebaum, the writer of “The Torture Myth” --in context of the decision of electing a new Attorney General--would argue that torture is very seldomly effective, violates a person’s rights, and should be outlawed due to the irrational need upon which physical torture is used. On the other hand, Michael Levin strongly argues that physical torture is crucial to solving every imminent danger to civilians. Levin claims that if you don’t physically torture someone, you are being weak and want to allow innocent people to die over something that could have been simply done.

In Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture”, he uses many cases of emotional appeal to persuade the reader that torture is necessary in extreme cases. There are many terms/statements that stick with the reader throughout the essay so that they will have more attachment to what is being said. Levin is particularly leaning to an audience based in the United States because he uses an allusion to reference an event that happened within the states and will better relate to the people that were impacted by it. The emotional appeals used in this essay are used for the purpose of persuading the reader to agree that in extreme instances torture is necessary and the United States should begin considering it as a tactic for future cases of extremity.

“The case for torture” happens to be a notable work of Michael Levin, a philosophy professor of City University of New York. In many of his works, Levin has emphasized on philosophical aspects associated with science, logic and language. In the essay “The case for torture” the author tried to examine various circumstances to come to a conclusion that would indicate whether torture can be perceived as “just” in certain cases.

Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture” is the first article up for discussion. Overall Levin outclasses his peers in terms of writing, argumentation, and rhetoric. First off he utilizes a plethora of rhetorical devices. His essay contains anadiplosis, alliteration, hypophora, parallelism among other devices. For example, an effective use of anadiplosis resides in paragraph seven: “I am not advocating torture as punishment. Punishment is addressed to deed irrevocably past.” By ending one sentence with the word

“Brown Note” Myth Busters. Discovery channel. Artarmon 16 Feb. 2005. Television. In this episode they test one way of torture. It was more based on mental resistance as it didn’t inflict physical pain. It shows that one mental health has a lot to do with how effective torture is. Somebody who is used to stress should be able to resist longer than somebody who isn’t.

Dershowitz argues that there are two ways to deal with a ticking bomb terrorist, besides doing nothing and letting innocent people die. These options include continuing to torture behind closed door or to utilize torture and make this information open to the

In Defense of Torture “Because It Is Wrong:” A Meditation on Torture Rules Should Govern Torture, Dershowitz Says