On 1st November 2003, the Associated Press published a report on inhumane treatment and deaths at Abu Ghraib along with other American prison cells as confessed by ex-Iraqi detainees (Associated Press, 2003). Photos of prisoners being shamed, tortured and abused sexually have been made public (Higham and Stephens, 2004). The Office of Legal Counsel in United States Department of Justice used the Torture Memos, which sanctioned some advanced interrogation techniques involving the torture, to justify the prison wardens’ actions. While act of torture in essence is morally wrong, I will argue that there are one-off extreme cases under which torture is morally justifiable so long as torture is not institutionalized. To begin, we have to seek a common definition of torture and explain why it is morally impermissible before uncovering the extreme cases.
According to United Nations Human Rights (1987):
Torture is defined as “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is
…show more content…
Torturing a person to death is surely worse than killing but not all tortures entail killing. Both acts disrupt the normal conduct of human life. During the period of torture, the victim experience extreme pain (mental or physical or both) and there is an imbalance of power relation between the torturer and victim as the latter is utterly powerless. The severe suffering and the loss of autonomy experienced by the victim, he would seemingly rather be dead than being tortured. Moreover a dead person has no autonomy, so if torturing strips the victim’s freedom, there is little difference between being tortured and death. However, it does not imply that torture is less preferable to killing. Also, it does not imply that the act of torture is morally worse than killing because torture may be short termed and that the victim’s will may be still intact but there is certainly no life for the victim if he is
In the article “The Case for Torture”, Michael Levin argues that the use of torture as a way to save lives is justifiable and necessary. Levin draws a series of cases where torture might be acceptable so as to set certain precedent for the justification of torture in more realistic cases. HoweverLevin illustrates three cases where torture might be justifiable.he describes a terrorist keeping city of millions hostage to an atomic bomb, the second, a terrorist who has implanted remote bombs on a plane and the third, a terrorist who has kidnapped a baby. torture and its consequences have been recorded in countries around of world over a vast span of time, and for a variety of reasons. Levin makes no such attempt to expand his article beyond
After finding some torture tactics, it helped me research about the negative effects of torture. In his article, “Torture is a Crime”, Curt Goering listed the negative effects of torture. He argues that torture is illegal, ineffective, immoral and makes those around us unsafe. Curt uses ethos in his piece to back up his main argument. For example, he mentions that in 1984, the UN adopted the Convention against torture and it was ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1990.
Mahatma Gandhi, the preeminent leader of the Indian independence movement states “You can chain me, you can torture me, you can even destroy this body, but you will never imprison my mind.” This is important because torture is brutal on the body and mind. The article “Torture’s Terrible Toll” by John McCain is more convincing then the article “The Case for Torture” by Michael Levin because McCain provides more logical reasoning, he adds his own personal experience of being a captured prisoner during the Vietnam War, and he creates an emotional bond with people around the world. Through more logical reasoning McCain Argument is more valid than Levin.
In the case that there is sufficient evidence of guilt as well as coconspirators, torture may be allowed but none that is inhumane. Document B: The Massachusetts Body of Liberties allows torture in the case that somebody is deemed guilty by clear evidence. In the Laws of Connecticut Colony, no torture is allowed whatsoever. Document C: Mather advises judges to continue the regular American method of obtaining confessions and to abstain from torture, for confusion is more likely to get a confession than torture. Document D: Henry warns that Congress will attempt to extort confession by practicing torture.
In reality torturing includes physical, mental, or verbal to be exact. Article 5 from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says, “Nobody has the right to torture, harm, or humiliate you. Presently, in the memoir Night by Elie Wiesel in chapter 4 pg.64 says, “I saw Idek with a young Polish girl, half-naked on a mattress. Idek leapt up turned around and saw me while the girl tried to cover up her breasts.” Also on chapter 4 pg.65 states, “Lie down on it, on your stomach!”
The Case for Torture Wins Torture is it morally acceptable? Many have debated this argument but I would like to bring up two main conflicting view points from Michael Levin, and Marzieh Ghisai. Michael Levin is a Jewish law professor who wrote The Case for Torture where he advocates where torture is acceptable in some circumstances.
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).”
For some inexplicable reason I feel as if I am unsafe. Torture is this feeling; worse, this torture has not plan for peace in my future. AND YOU! You clearly don’t understand what it means to be dead. You disturb me the most.
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.
08 Feb. 2016. This source explains that torture is actually one of the last methods used when they are interrogating someone since many know that it has a very low success rate. If the person is not willing to cooperate, they go down a list. Many people thought to use the top methods as they are not as immoral. Getting to the end of the list thought means they have nothing else to make the person talk which is why they use
The United States invasion of Iraq in 2003 was dubbed Operation Iraqi Freedom by US Forces, but it seemed like freedom was the last thing on their minds. Abu Ghraib prison was an occupied Iraqi prison where the US Army held mass incarcerations and sponsored inmate torture. 2007 marked the year that a documentary titled “Ghosts of Abu Ghraib” was produced by HBO and directed by Rory Kennedy. This documentary showed the abuses and injustices inured to the Iraqi prisoners at the hands of the United States Soldiers. Although the guards at Abu Ghraib Prison Complex had personal reservations against the treatment of the prisoners, they were manipulated into authoritarianism by their overzealous obedience.
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.
There are many interpretations of what torture is and how something can be classified as torture. In “Believe Me It’s Torture” Christopher Hitchens talks about the United States and its various uses of interrogation tactics to get Important information from suspected terrorists. In the article the author often brings up the waterboarding tactic that is often used and how there is a large controversy over whether it is in fact torture or if it is just simply harmless. The article states, “waterboarding was something that Americans did to other Americans, it was inflicted upon and endured by the Special Forces in a form of training called S.E.R.E (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape) so that they could build up a resistance to it so that they
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. One major eye catching factor of this essay is the repetitive use of words that imply certain stigmas.
In Michael Levin's The Case for Torture, Levin provides an argument in which he discusses the significance of inflicting torture to perpetrators as a way of punishment. In his argument, he dispenses a critical approach into what he believes justifies torture in certain situations. Torture is assumed to be banned in our culture and the thought of it takes society back to the brutal ages. He argues that societies that are enlightened reject torture and the authoritative figure that engage in its application risk the displeasure of the United States. In his perspective, he provides instances in which wrongdoers put the lives of innocent people at risk and discusses the aspect of death and idealism.