ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of Torture

1251 Words6 Pages

Torture is a technique that has been used for centuries, starting in the middle ages. The case for torture has been and always will be a highly debatable topic. Some may ask is the case for torture really necessary in some cases? Will the United States be subject to terrorist attacks if torture is avoided? Is there really a happy medium? Many argue that without torture the United States would not be as strong of a Country today. Others believe that torture has done nothing but cause the United States more harm than good. Both the positives and negatives of using torture is controversial, when discussed among many across the world.
Many might believe that torture is unconstitutional and immoral, but according to Michael Levin in “The Case for …show more content…

Dershowitz in “The Case for Torture Warrants”, the choice for using torture should be made with visibility and accountability, either by a judicial officer or by the President of the United States. After the terrorist attacks on September 11, the FBI officials made it publicly known that they were not able to obtain information from suspected terrorists conventionally, which caught many American’s attention. Many debated the case for torture among suspects who have access to deadly information after these attacks. This was also debated in Israel, when the Israeli Supreme Court outlawed all use of torture by law enforcement even though it's officials got suspects to open their mouths after suffering torture. Dershowitz believes that a torture warrant is a plausible solution to this nation wide debate. Obtaining a warrant would be systematic, judges would require enough compelling evidence before issuing a warrant to any official, and even after getting the warrant the official would tell the suspect that he would gain immunity if they told them the information they wanted, if that did not work then they would resort to torture. Dershowitz argues that the suspects rights would be better protected with a warrant and he states that the case of torture should be discussed now, before anything detrimental happens to the United States. He also believes that the case of torture should be public, and the decision should be made by public figures that are accountable and on the highest

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
828 Words | 4 Pages

Foreign Policies of Carter and Reagan Critical Thinking Assignment Overtime America has worked its way to becoming an important international power. The country upholds this position by establishing the proper systems to maintain being a strong country that is able to defend itself and protect its people’s needs. Both Presidential leaders Jimmy Carter and Ronald Regan would work to help America develop a good position on international affairs in a time where the country had faced conflict over it borders. During both of their presidential terms, the Cold War was going on where they would both adopt new measures to ease the tension between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Read More
313 Words | 2 Pages

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.

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
581 Words | 3 Pages

Although torturing is considered wrong by many people today, I agree with Michael Levin that torture should be an option in certain situations because it could save the lives of American people. Levin says in his article “Torturing a terrorist unconstitutional? Probably. But millions of lives surely outweigh constitutionality (Levin 605).”

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
918 Words | 4 Pages

In the reading “The Case for Torture” written by Michael Levin, and published on the June 7th, 1982 edition of Newsweek. Levin argues in favor of torture as an acceptable way of obtaining information when innocent lives are at stake. Outlining three separate scenarios devised to make the reader reconsider the stance on torturer in order to protect the interest of those in the western area. The strength of this text is that the absence of reasoning does not strike the reader; he is overcome by Levin’s ability to break ethical decisions down to black and white. Levin begins with describing torture as “morally mandatory”.

Read More
1032 Words | 5 Pages

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).”

Read More
586 Words | 3 Pages

In this paper I will discuss the issue of torture. More precisely, i will be looking at “The abolition of torture” by Sullivan and “The truth about torture: it’s time to be honest about doing a terrible thing” by Krauthammer. I will be arguing that Sullivan presents a better case than Krauthammer on the issue of whether a liberal democratic community ought to ever resort to torture, because i feel that Sullivan presents strong points and Krauthammer presents weak ones. I will begin by outlining the key points in Krauthammer’s argument, and then outline the points in Sullivan’s argument.

Read More
1207 Words | 5 Pages

Many experts argue that torture is an unreliable means of getting useful information. Weighing the costs and benefits of the use of torture has been a topic of debate since the tragic events of 9/11. Since the American government decided that the use of torture to gain information from suspected terrorists in the aftermath attacks of that day. Is the use of torture ever ethical?

Read More
955 Words | 4 Pages

Torture is universally prohibited in both national and International law worldwide. It is a fundamental violation of human rights that cannot be derogated from. Essentially, torture is said to constitute any physical and mental act by which severe pain or suffering is intentionally inflicted upon a person ( UNCAT).Torture is mainly used for purposes that are set out to degraded, embarrass, and induce destruction in the person being subjected to torture and those in close relation to the person being tortured .Torture is a mechanism used by those in authoritative positions to preserve themselves in power (Power, 2006:2). Despite the universal prohibition on torture, its use has been widespread throughout history, and especially of late in the wake of September 11 2001 and other recent terrorist atrocities to combat the aforementioned heinous terrorist attacks.

Read More
1005 Words | 5 Pages

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

Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Torture

Related Topics

Open Document