"I have watched in bemusement" at the debate on the use of torture, especially after Bin Laden's fatal capture. Without the ability to set up a real poll, here is the best I can do:
How do you feel about the use of torture?
A. It is justified when the object is to save lives.
B. It is justified when the U.S. or its allies use it to save lives.
C. It is justified when a democratic country uses it to save lives.
D. It is justified when a democratic country with good intentions uses it to save lives.
E. It is justified when a democratic country with good intentions uses it when there is a 50% chance that the one being tortured knows something and that there is a 50% chance that what he/she knows may save lives.
F. It is justified when a democratic country with good intentions uses it when there is a 10% chance that the one being tortured knows something and that there is a 10% chance that what he/she knows may save lives. After a specified time period it the tortured person reveals no secrets, it is justified under the same circumstances to torture his or her family or loved ones in order to save lives.
G. It is justified under certain circumstances which I can not specify but I will know them when I see them.
H. In all practical circumstances, i.e. not a fantasy 'ticking bomb' scenario, it is not justified. But please don't quote Thomas Moore from A Man for All Seasons about "And in your pursuit of the devil would you cut down every law?"
I. Other - please explain. As in most things, I'm still searching for an answer, so please share your thoughts and ideas.
3 comments:
In answer (B), it is understood that, although England is a U.S. ally, torture would not be allowed against the Irish, but, perhaps, justified when used by the Irish against the English.
If you can, please provide a comment with your vote cast for "Other". I think we truly would like to hear what you are thinking. It's a tough question so any thoughts are welcome, even if it's only "I don't know." or "Hey, it was good enough for Catholic Schools, it should be good enough for anyone."
I checked the "other" box for two reasons. The first reason was that I have problems with the word "justified" -- meaning, I take it, that if we take this course, we will be fully exonerated from blame for the consequences of our action. How can we say any action is fully "justified" when it is necessarily performed in uncertainty, or as Bonhoeffer says, "wholly in the twilight which the historical situation spreads over good and evil." Consequently, as he says, "neither the purity of the motivation, nor the opportune circumstances, nor the value, nor the significant purpose of an intended undertaking can become the governing law of [your] action, a law to which [you] can withdraw, to which [you] can appeal as an authority, and by which [you] can be exculpated and acquitted." There is no such thing as an action being justified.
OK, with that theoretical problem out of the way, the other reason I voted for "other" is that my general opposition to torture has to do with the fact that it doesn't yield good or reliable information. It yields information, but anyone will say anything to stop the pain. There are better methods.
Post a Comment