ipl-logo

The Benefits Of Torture

996 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The case of torture

My topic of discussion for this paper is, is it ever permissible to torture a person? This argument will include both the main argument and the counter argument. This argument is meant to be inductive. In this finial paper, I will ultimately be defending the position against using torture because the use of torture is not only illegal, but it is not effective and it treats people as less to nothing. Torture is longed age practice and still so to this present day. The word torture has been fine toned into words like interrogation, just to hide its true meaning of evil. No matter how this word has been changed over the years, it still doesn’t make it right. Torture is intentionally inflicting severe pain and dehumanizing someone to gain information. …show more content…

Conclusion: Therefore, it is permissive to torture a person
This argument is inductive because all premises are true. The premises are strong and valid, they support the conclusion. From the main argument premise 1 is true as the United Nation draws awareness on torture to form an Act against torture in the United Nation Convention Against Torture 1984 (OHCHR), if not for any reason, I stand against torture for this reason.
In premise 2, this is said to be true because torture in all cases don’t result to any useful information. Looking back, the use of torture has not yield any solution at least, there is no 100% prove it does. There are other means of extracting information than the use of torture. Those that are been tortured can give any information to avoid been tortured, torturers are sure that they can’t get the correct information they need; hence the act …show more content…

Most of these are the Geneva Convention of 1949, the American Convention on Human Rights of 1977, the international convention on civil and political Right of 1977, The United Nation convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of 1988, the lists go on. Torture has, without a doubt gained increasing attention over the years, this is to show that not only is torture wrong, but it is evil. Amongst all, torture damages the reputation of the constitution and what it stands for.
If torture was the answer or solution for wrong doers, then there wouldn’t be need for torture in the first place. This subsequently means that torture isn’t an effective means to get information. Torture has internationally been criticized and the long-term effect it has on victim, which has been medically and scientifically proven, the wrongness makes it evil and

Show More
Related
185 Words | 1 Pages

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

Read More
1694 Words | 7 Pages

Many have said that they would want nonlethal torture to be used in such cases but “did not want torture to be officially recognized by our legal system.” Similar statements have posited that while “torture might be necessary in a given situation it could never be right.” This approach, that of keeping torture off-the-books, is in direct conflict with the necessity for accountability and transparency in a democracy. A democracy cannot work if the public is kept in the dark. The public must know what is going on in order to approve or disapprove.

Read More
699 Words | 3 Pages

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.

Read More
686 Words | 3 Pages

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.

Read More
515 Words | 3 Pages

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.

Read More
1579 Words | 7 Pages

Pro-CIA Torture To begin, the US and it’s central intelligence agency, also known as the CIA are torturing captives, and it’s up for debate. The US should allow the CIA to torture its prisoners. It’s a way to get very valuable information from them. The torture techniques leave no marks or traces left behind on the victim. It strikes fear in the to be tortured prisoners so that they make talk before the CIA even lays a finger on them.

Read More
1163 Words | 5 Pages

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.

Read More
971 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More
1050 Words | 5 Pages

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.

Read More
1088 Words | 5 Pages

It is disturbing to learn how people were humiliated and maltreated, and how exquisitely brutal were the devices invented to subdue and discipline people. The reason torture was commonly accepted during the Middle Ages was the lack of police or law enforcement. It was believed that to prevent crime,

Read More
1171 Words | 5 Pages

How would The Founding Fathers Deal with Three Modern Issues Facing America? The Founding Fathers had all different kinds of political views. For example, there was Thomas Jefferson and he believed that central power should be controlled, restrained, and restricted (“Founding” para. 5). Thomas Jefferson was against homosexual marriage, abortion, and cruel and unusual punishment.

Read More
1205 Words | 5 Pages

Torture isn't just wrong morally but legally according to the Geneva Convention and needs to end. There is no guarantee that torture actually

Read More
962 Words | 4 Pages

In this article the author asks the question as to whether torture is a viable source in getting information. Since there is other moral ways of getting information. Some of these methods have shown to be more efficient. They also leave the victim’s mind intact. Janoff-Bulman, Ronnie.

Read More
591 Words | 3 Pages

Therefore, torture should not be used on any grounds. Torture should not be used in any circumstance whatsoever. One of many reasons would be because it is unconstitutional. By torturing another human being it obstructs his/her rights as a living and breathing human being.

Read More
890 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More

More about The Benefits Of Torture

Related Topics

Open Document