ipl-logo

Categorical Moral Reasoning

1005 Words5 Pages

The two moral reasonings are consequentialist and categorical. Consequentialist means the consequences that will result after whatever you do, whether it is the right or wrong thing to do. Categorical moral reasoning locates morality in certain duties and rights. Somethings are just morally wrong even if it brings good outcomes. According to Mill the principle of utility means realizing a consequence of something before you do it,whether your intentions are good or bad. What Mill means by utilitarianism is giving the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people. According to Sandel's lecture Mill's utilitarianism uses consequentialist reasoning. Categorical means absolute for example, if someone asks you if you are hungry a you say,"no", …show more content…

In Defense of Torture “Because It Is Wrong:” A Meditation on Torture Rules Should Govern Torture, Dershowitz Says What ethical arguments are being made? Torture is okay to use. Torture is wrong. Torture should be okay in some circumstances What evidence is being given? This author agrees that torture should be used because in war we have dropped bombs on innocent people that have either killed or left children, woman, and good men in critical condition, which is close to being torture. In the texts he says," There is no escaping the fact that whenever we drop bombs, we drop them with knowledge that some number of children will be blinded, disemboweled, paralyzed, orphaned, and killed by them". C. Fried and was against torture, he explains that Washington said to treat the captured in battle with humanity so they won't have a reason to complain that we were hurting people like those in the British army. He is stating that torture should be allowed with rules instead of just torturing somebody to the extreme for some information. In the text it says, " We know, for example, if Sheikh Khalid Mohammed, a very high value detainee, was subjected to waterboarding. That is, he was placed on a board, his head was put into the water, near drowning experiences were inflicted on

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
701 Words | 3 Pages

Heymann stated that the fear of that led us to accept the Geneva convention. This shows that he is not just assuming that torture is bad and dangerous based on emotional stance. He is using a strong source, Geneva convention, to say that if you look back to the people and let people define right and wrong without some structure the world would run ramped. Therefore using the acceptance of the Geneva convention to say that we have some sort of

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
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
893 Words | 4 Pages

About two years ago, a C.I.A. torture report was released, the subject on detainees captured after September 11, who were suspected to be linked to the attack. One of the more famous detainees, Majid Khan, who had been afflicted with Al Qaeda, was captured in 2003 and was held at Guantanamo Bay since 2006. He says that the interrogators waterboarded him twice, was moved among series of C.I.A. operated “black sites” over some months, and the torture still continued. He was beaten repeatedly, hung from a wooden beam for three days, and shackled and starved. He was even submerged in an ice bath, the transparent ice burning his skin like fire, slowly numbing his body.

Read More
1088 Words | 5 Pages

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.

Read More
1125 Words | 5 Pages

Over one-fourth of the cases overturned each year are due to a forced confession (Innocence Project). Yet, forced confessions due to intense interrogation are prevalent throughout the investigative community. Interrogation is not only used in investigations today but was also used during The Salem Witch Trials which can be seen in Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible. Due to the use of interrogation and the presence of false confessions in investigations, it is necessary to examine the following research question: To what degree are the Salem Witch Trials affected by forced confessions?

Read More
962 Words | 4 Pages

Annotated Bibliography-“How effective is torture in obtaining information?” “Brown Note” Myth Busters. Discovery channel. Artarmon 16 Feb. 2005. Television.

Read More
1055 Words | 5 Pages

In the Ethical Life, by Russ Shafer-Landau, chapters written by Michael Walzer and Alan Dershowitz express their knowledge and opinions on the topics of terrorism and torture. Is it possible to justify and defend such acts? In the chapter “Terrorism: A Critique of Excuses”, author Michael Walzer shuts down four excuses that attempt to justify terrorism. In the chapter, “Should the Ticking Bomb Terrorist Be Tortured?”, Alan Dershowitz defends his theory that it is necessary to torture a terrorist if that means saving the lives of innocent people while protecting their civil liberties and human rights at the same time. Terrorism can never be moral because it violates all “excuses” and torture is an acceptable tactic to save lives.

Read More
1429 Words | 6 Pages

Regarding tortures conducted by American military in Iraq, Ignatieff (Ibid, p.24) indicates the U.S.’s self-contradiction by stating “a country that thinks it is too virtuous, too exceptional, to pay respect to the Geneva Conventions and begins to write its own rules about detention, interrogation, and special status can end up violating every value it holds dear”. Hancock (2007, p.53) also wrote that, while human rights violations in friendly countries are overlooked “as counter terrorism, cultural diversity, necessary acts of self-defense, unproved allegations, tragic mistakes or as regrettable exceptions to an otherwise improving trend” and those acts in “states of peripheral concern to Washington policymakers” are simply ignored even if those are severe, those in enemy counties are “selectively highlighted…as proof of evil and repressive regimes”. Thus, the U.S. has created its own standards distinctively applied to itself and its allies, and its enemies (Hoffmann, 2005; Ignatieff, 2005; Hancock, 2007), and the language of human rights has utilized as technique to legitimize the standards and foreign policies based on those standards (Hancock,

Read More

More about Categorical Moral Reasoning

Related Topics

Open Document