ipl-logo

Summary Of Should The Ticking Bomb Prisoner By Alan Dershowitz

1694 Words7 Pages

Alan Dershowitz begins his article “ Should the Ticking Bomb Terrorist Be Tortured” by questioning whether one person can be tortured to save the lives of many others. Dershowitz displays both sides of the argument before shifting the question. Dershowitz asserts that the question is not if torture should be used on a ticking bomb terrorist, rather the question is whether the torture is done openly under a legal framework or secretly and illegally. He then simplifies the conflict to the prioritization of values. While the argument that Dershowitz constructs seems to leave very little room for disagreement, there are ways in which to collapse his entire premise. By broadening the argument, Dershowitz’s entire claim can be avoided. Dershowitz …show more content…

The first option Dershowitz brings is to allow security services to continue to use torture in a “twilight zone which is outside the realm of law.” The second option is to claim that the state is lawful and doesn’t allow torture while turning a blind eye to the torture occurring behind closed doors. The third option, clearly the choice preferred by Dershowitz, is the road of truth. It is the road of transparency which creates a framework for torture to limit it and prevent terrorism. The fourth option is simply to have no torture whatsoever and allowing “preventable terrorist acts to occur.” Dershowitz rejects this option immediately on the premise that any democracy would demand an act of terror such as the attacks of 9/11 be prevented if at all …show more content…

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. In a democracy, we want our government to represent us. We don’t want any actions taken with which we disapprove. These decisions cannot be made about actions done in secrecy. Regarding this variance, Dershowitz demands constancy. He states that if an action is necessary, than it should be legalized but if it is not legalized, don’t do

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
1661 Words | 7 Pages

Nick Flynn spends a large majority of his memoir, The Ticking is the Bomb, reflecting on both the Abu Ghraib prison scandal of 2004-2005 and his impending fatherhood, seemingly placing two incompatible ideas side by side. At first glance, the memoir seems disjointed and causes the reader to question why Flynn would choose to write about parenthood alongside depictions of torture. Close examination of the text, however, reveals Flynn’s complex and nuanced worldview. Flynn finds torture to be reprehensible, and a significant portion of the memoir is devoted to coming to terms with the fact that he had shaken hands with known torture-advocate Sam Harris. Perhaps he does not wish to raise his daughter in a world where scandals like Abu Ghraib

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
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
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
742 Words | 3 Pages

Specifically, Levitsky and Ziblatt refer to democracy's guardrails as its norms, namely mutual tolerance and institutional forbearance. The former relates to the recognition that your political opponents have a right to rule as long as they follow constitutional rules. Institutional forbearance refers to restraint in using legal measures to block political rivals' right to govern. When political groups slowly violate these norms by deploying legal measures, Levitsky and Ziblatt propose that political actors become more willing to reject democratic institutions altogether. In the U.S., both mutual tolerance and institutional forbearance seem deeply at risk.

Read More
257 Words | 2 Pages

Torture is never justified, it doesn’t matter who is being tortured or what information may be discovered. In his book, Slahi gives the reader a grim picture of what prisoners held at Guantanamo are subjected to 24 hours a day. Detainees are tortured in and out of interrogation and the methods that are used vary. For instance, during one interrogation Slahi was sexually assaulted by two female personnel saying they were going to teach him about “great American sex.” (Slahi, P. 230)

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
212 Words | 1 Pages

In this movie we have dealt a very important issue that threatened the lives of millions in the United States. Torture is regarded as wrong for many reasons. If we look to it from another point of view we can conclude that: Torturing the terrorist is unethical and can't be justified, but it can be understood, and it can be forgiven. Torturing the terrorist is unethical, but in this circumstance it is the 'right thing to do'.  Governments have used torture to keep themselves in power, to enforce their particular political philosophy, to remove opposition and to implement particular policies.

Read More
962 Words | 4 Pages

"Erroneous Assumptions: Popular Belief in the Effectiveness of Torture Interrogation." Peace & Conflict 13.4 (2007): 429-435. Academic Search Complete. Web. 14 Feb. 2016.

Read More
1055 Words | 5 Pages

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

Read More
799 Words | 4 Pages

Dershowitz says that torture is happening and states a fact of the Israeli Secret Services and how they do use a “form” of torture to obtain information, again going along with Mill’s statement, “doing the bad to get the good”. When we take a look at Charles and Greg’s discuss they feel completely different, torture is just not acceptable. They feel like we should all have self-respect and honor each other’s self-worth. They relate mostly to Kant’s position on torture, moral laws. Kant also agrees that, we should treat each other equally and that any form of torture just isn’t the appropriate

Read More
1948 Words | 8 Pages

These two issues can go hand in hand because if torture is abused, it will be easier to torture the wrong person; and if the wrong person gets tortured, it can cause more abuses of torture because of the practice of targeting the wrong person. As in all forms of punishment torture can become abused and as such human rights will be violated, and so a question is needed to be answered: when does an action violate a right? Because even when torture is being used for the sake of security and when it is being abused they are both exercising the same

Read More

More about Summary Of Should The Ticking Bomb Prisoner By Alan Dershowitz

Related Topics

Open Document