Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Summary of the case for torture
Advantages of torture
Advantages of 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.
Summary of the case for torture
Advantages of torture
Advantages of 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
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 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.
The moment that the Twin Towers fell in New York, America became destined for change. In the wake of these attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 was quickly passed through congress, and signed by then-president, George W. Bush. The act itself gives the FBI and other government agencies the ability to do and use certain methods, many of which are already used by other law enforcement organizations, to help prevent future terrorist attacks. Since then, this piece of legislation has been the center of much debate and controversy. But, there is ample reason to believe that the Patriot Act is needed and effective.
Many people might think that torture is cruel, unacceptable and it does not show humanity. In contrast, Michael Levin says that implementing torture is needed to prevent future evil acts. In “The Case for Torture”, Michael Levin also makes it clear that there are situations in which torture is not merely acceptable but morally necessary. Levin argues that implementing torture to save people lives is morally right and reasonable. Levin’s purpose of his text is to let people know that there are times when torture becomes an option to save and protect innocent lives.
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.
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.
America is a place we call home and it should be kept for everyone to feel secure of our environment. The major tragedy that occurred in September, 11 2001. This event changed every ones view of the world by not knowing who the enemy is, or not being able to trust anyone around us. When the major event happened, it sent out a message about the attack all over the world. The United States now lives in fear of enemies.
“At least 42 terrorist attacks aimed at the United States have been thwarted since 9/11” (Reality). The majority of people know about the tragedy that happened on September 11th, 2001, but not that many people know about what came to be after the event; the Patriot Act. This act is the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001” (Miller). The Patriot Act got put in place by the President and almost got a unanimous vote to pass it nearly ten days after. It was later used to take down many of the 42 attack plots.
Web. 08 Feb. 2016. In this report the author explain that many CIA agents believe that physical torture is not as effective as psychological torture. For example, leaving them naked in front of other people will
Throughout history, torture has been practice as a way of punishment and method to get information. Many countries and cultures have included this strategy in their justice system. In fact, many people nowadays are against this technic. But those people are obsoletely wrong. In 1984, the United Nations General assembly adopted this topic to be in consideration.
Intimidation, threading, humiliation, discomfort and pain are all different practices of torture. Torture is usually used to extract information and confessions from prisoners and suspects detained by the government. The government permits specific groups and individuals the authority to utilize these techniques to accomplish objective. [Provide examples so that the reader can better understand who gets to do this and who has authority to allow it to happen.] In other circumstances, torturing someone is merely criminal.
Can torture be justified? Every single human being would be able to distinguish between right and wrong, compassion and outright brutality. In my opinion, those capable of performing torture on any living thing has a subconscious desire and affinity for doing so. I believe they enjoy it yet hide under the banner of a "necessary evil" and "for the greater good."
People claim that nowadays they are living in surveillance society because Big Brother in twenty first century is keeping a close eye on people’s daily life. If so what is the meaning of Big Brother? The word Big Brother first introduced in George Orwell’s book named 1984. He said that “Big Brother is Watching You. ”(George Orwell, published year).
Death Penalty According to the 2010 Gallup Poll, 64% of the United State of America are supporting the death penalty, I as an American am part of that 36% that is against it. I do not believe that we as human being should determine whether another person should live or die. A second reason that I am against the death penalty is for the reason that the accused person could be innocent and normally the accused person only has one court presentation and is only judged by the judge not a jury of their peer, and is sent to death row where they pay for a crime that they haven’t done. My final reason that i do not believe that the death penalty should count as a punishment for the American people is because, a person that has done a massive massacre shouldn’t just be able to leave the world just like that without paying and suffering for what they have done, Or should the death punishment continue as it is for it has a great benefit to us as citizens of the United States.