Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Case for Torture
Review the case for torture
The Case for Torture
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Case for Torture
Review the case for torture
The Case for Torture
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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
In " Torture's Terrible Toll", an essay written by John McCain, the topic of torture is highly discouraged. McCain feels very strongly that it should not be allowed except in only a very high risk and time sensitive situation. McCain makes six claims throughout the rest of the essay. They are that the abuse of prisoners harms the war effort, that prisoner abuse has a terrible toll and threatens our moral standings, that mistreatment of prisoner harms us more than our enemies, that we shouldn't have to compromise our values to get information, that torture is torture whether physical or mental, and that we should not compromise our values and lose the sense of honor that we hold. Basically, he is saying that the United States should show that they are different from other nations.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It is very difficult to get dangerous people to talk, so we use dangerous methods to get them to talk. Getting all the information from prisoners, terrorists, gangsters, and mobsters held by the CIA is crucial to saving American lives. After the Boston Marathon bombing one of the suspects escaped from the scene and the other was caught by police, the one that was held by the CIA was tortured until he spoke of his brother’s hideout where police shot and killed the terrorist. Without torture there would still be a terrorist running free on the streets of Boston. In 2011 the CIA
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.
Applebaum has plenty of evidence to back up her claim that physical torture is not effective, and there are many other ways to obtain information. While the fear-encouraging and questioning elements are potent to many who are afraid of terror committed against them, but when the overwhelming sentiment of Levin’s argument is being compared to the logic and ethical points of Applebaum it is clear to see the superiority of her argument. Although Levin would advocate for physical torture in extreme situations, one must expect extreme consequences. Physical torture is rarely effective, violates rights, and damages a whole nation’s credibility. This is why physical torture should not be
"Enhanced Interrogation" is a term that was introduced by the George W. Bush administration. This type of investigation includes physically forcible interventions, such as waterboarding, sleep deprivation, facial slapping, forced standing for days and so on. Torture has been an argument for a long time to fight terrorism, but it is a bigger issue, especially after the incident of September 11, 2001. And still, it is not over that we should use "Enhanced Interrogation" or not. The techniques that are utilized in this type of investigation they are unethically and morally wrong, but they work.
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).”
Freedom of press Thomas Jefferson’s quote “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press and that cannot be limited without being lost.” is completely accurate. If the freedom of press was restricted it would get rid of all we fought for during the revolutionary war. With it, it allows people to voice their opinion.
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
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
Most of the time when someone is tortured it is because the interrogators are desperate for Important or valuable information. However, why would real “terrorist” give up valuable information that would expose their cause and what they believe in when they know they are going to die one way or the other. This just goes to show that the “suspected terrorist” are in fact suspected and aren’t real terrorist and shouldn’t be