Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why the use of torture never justified
Why torture is morally wrong
Should torture be acceptable
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why the use of torture never justified
Why torture is morally wrong
Should torture be acceptable
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Why the use of torture never justified
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.
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.
It seamlessly effects the reader by asking a question that asks to think deeper than just the surface of the main topic at hand: lowering the bar for individual students. In addition to the previous article, Torture Might Work, also includes a number of pathos examples. One in particular is, “Beg pardon, but we have been asking the wrong question. What matters is not whether torture works. What matters is whether torture is right.”
“Authorizing torture is a bad and dangerous idea that can easily be made to sound plausible.” This is a shockingly true statement. Heymann’s purpose in writing this article is to persuade readers to agree with him that torture should not be authorized. Heymann uses the persuasive appeal of pathos primarily in this article to convince his readers to agree with him. Although that is not to say he did not use other forms of persuasive appeal, heymann also used Logos and Ethos, just not as strongly as Pathos.
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.
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.
After arguing the failure of prisons, Mendieta establishes his agreement with Davis’ anti-prison rhetoric without introducing the author, her book, or other various abolitionist efforts, “I will also argue that Davis’s work is perhaps one of the best philosophical as well as political responses to the expansion of the prison system...” (Mendieta 293). The article’s author also assumes that readers are familiar with specific torture tactics used on prisoners,“...the United States is facing one of its most devastating moral and political debacles in its history with the disclosures of torture at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and other such prisons…” (293). Mendieta’s act of assuming that readers will already be familiar with Angela Davis and her work, as well as the specific methods of torture used by certain prisons, may cause readers to feel lost while reading the
Has anyone ever heard of something extremely dangerous and life-threatening and thought that, “Hey, let’s try that!”? Would they still want to try it if they knew it was a form of torment? Christopher Hitchens decides to endure a torture technique called “waterboarding” to learn more of its use among Americans. In Hitchens’s Believe Me, It’s Torture, he describes his experience enduring “waterboarding” to discourage use of it in America with use of the persuasive techniques ethos and logos.
Applebaum has plenty of evidence to back up her claim that physical torture is not effective, and there are many other ways to obtain information. While the fear-encouraging and questioning elements are potent to many who are afraid of terror committed against them, but when the overwhelming sentiment of Levin’s argument is being compared to the logic and ethical points of Applebaum it is clear to see the superiority of her argument. Although Levin would advocate for physical torture in extreme situations, one must expect extreme consequences. Physical torture is rarely effective, violates rights, and damages a whole nation’s credibility. This is why physical torture should not be
Sometimes Enhanced Interrogation does not even work because detainee can give misleading information so that they will stop the pain. Sometimes our government detain an innocent person and then
Many believe that being interrogated by American intelligence should not be a pleasant experience for enemy combatants such as terrorists. Levin presents torture as the only method to safeguard civilians,but this is a violation against human rights and inhumane. Although
An inmate that was one of the few lucky to be released from Guantanamo Bay said in press conference that everyone is tortured at GTMO (Associated Press). In most cases the Government says that they use torture as means to get intelligence,basically the ends justify the means. However according to DeGarmo, that there is no scientifically evidence that suggest torturing plays a significant role in gaining valuable intelligence in fact science proves that torture plays no role in what so ever in gaining intelligence. When taking a step back and looking at the picture we can see that the majority of the inmates being tortured have been in GTMO for five years or more, so any intelligence that we would obtain them would either be, one out of date or two, inaccurate given the fact that the inmates have no accesses to the outside world. Furthermore the act of using intelligence to gain intelligence is never acceptable and violates human rights and the Geneva Convention (DeGarmo).
Terroristic Torture Argument Terrorism in America is a sophisticated problem in the United States that affects everyone in some form. To help prevent terrorism from being an intense problem and to protect the people within the country, terroristic torture has been controversial topic. Terroristic torture can save lives and prevent future acts of terrorism within America. Terroristic torture can be used carefully with specialized technics to help protect the American people of future terroristic attacks that may cause them to get injured or even killed.
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.
This is similar to our CIA society today, For torture to happened it can not happen on U.S soil. It must happen some place else.