To compare utilitarianism to enhanced interrogations and find out if they are ethical or not, one must apply the 4 steps of utilitarianism. First, one must identify all the options (Banks, 2013). An example of this would be “one has the option of interrogating a suspected terrorist in an enhanced manner or to just ask questions in a calm fashion.” Second, one must identify all affected by the decision including individuals, organizations, and the community (Banks, 2013). An example of this would be “Those likely to be affected by the decision are the suspected terrorists or detainees, their friends and family, the military, and the whole country.” Third, one must list the harms and benefits for all affected under Option 1, then Option 2, and so on (Banks, 2013). …show more content…
The detainees will receive no benefits, but the U.S. will receive benefits and may gain information to help reduce the risk of future potential terroristic threats from those detainees.” Another example would be “Under Option 2: The suspected terrorists will suffer no harm, but the U.S. possibly may by not getting any information and letting possible terrorists free to harm U.S. citizens. The detainees will receive the benefit of being free and not going through any interrogation techniques that may harm them, while the U.S. will receive no benefit.” Fourth, one must choose the option that produces the best outcome for all affected by the decision after calculating the good and bad (Banks,