Torture Essays: Examples, Topics, Titles, & Outlines

 

against torture essay

Against torture essay - World understandings that novices tend torture against essay to play a critical teaching, when creative products have been helpful in designing real. The pertinence of the first - and sixth gradersand older students to design directives facilitates the recognition of the. The Convention Against Torture Essay. One regime, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, establishes a strong elaboration of norms against torture. Despite its efforts, many countries still outright reject its policies against torture while other countries openly accept them, but. In “The Case Against Torture,” author and professor Alisa Soloman enumerates the reasons torture should never be practiced or justified in a civil society. Click on the link to view the essay: “The Case Against Torture” by Alisa Soloman As you read, look for the following: What is the author’s thesis? What key points does the author use to argue the thesis?


How to Argue Against Torture


It is quite popular, too, against torture essay. The former director of a prominent human rights center at Harvard writes of the judicious use of sleep deprivation, hooding, and targeted assassinations; he concedes the government's need to "traffic in evils.

No one who doubts that this is the case should be in a position of responsibility. Anti-torture voices have been left sounding defensive, insecure, incoherent. Yet, while boasting the world's highest incarceration numbers and supermax prisons characterized against torture essay a warden as a "clean version of hell," the US has also begun to question its tolerance of torture.

I intend here to lay the foundation for a strong, cogent anti-torture position. It rests upon three principles:. The first two principles reject torture on moral grounds it's wrong and legal ones it's bad. Unfortunately, they do not imply that one should never torture. If, indeed, our only choice is between two acts that are immoral, against torture essay, these two rules alone won't tell us what to do.

This central dilemma arises in principle—we can all imagine ourselves in an extreme situation about which we cannot say with certainty that we would not torture—but does it arise in practice? Many say, with some justification, that it does not. Whatever the case may be, there is a hefty price to pay for dismissing the central dilemma on implausibility grounds, as many liberals are wont to do. Once the improbable is deemed morally irrelevant, torture can no longer claim the status against torture essay absolute wrong, for there is no such thing as an "absolute-wrong-in-practice.

Hence my third principle, against torture essay. It stipulates that no ethical code ie, universal decision procedure should tell a would-be torturer what to do in all situations.

This is to avoid rationalization and, beyond it, the dilution of moral responsibility in the hypothetical case where not to torture is no less an immoral option than to do so the central dilemma. The third principle is a point of meta-ethics. It is not a moral rule per se, but a statement about the inapplicability of moral rules. It is designed to overcome the justificatory purposes embedded in any ethical code. One may object that the central dilemma arises with any moral wrong, so why single it out?

Because it lies at the core of the "torture issue" itself, which, with the wide support it enjoys, is indeed an issue. Against torture essay to aggregate universal moral principles into decision procedures, a central problem in ethics, is in my view the only interesting aspect of the torture question; the rest is straightforward.

Like many, I feel strongly enough about torture to find the very notion of a "torture debate" distasteful, against torture essay. But sentiment alone means nothing. I feel strongly about racism, too. But racism is not wrong because it offends my sensibilities. It is wrong because it violates reason and human dignity. Likewise, if we cannot offer a reasoned account of the absolute wrongness of torture especially given the wide public support against torture essay it then our impassioned opposition, indispensable though it may be, will still be, strictly speaking, meaningless.

It also matters because one cannot fight effectively for a cause one does not understand. Is it a coincidence that torture has remained so popular in this country amidst against torture essay an impoverished public discourse? W hat is torture? Supermax incarceration and prison rape can be construed as institutionalized forms of torture. For the purpose of this essay, however, I narrow down the definition to the forced exchange of information for the relief of unbearable pain.

Much like slavery, torture is coerced trade. To many, its abhorrence requires no empirical evidence: it is a priori, against torture essay, intuitive, and visceral. So much so, in fact, that even asking why seems immoral, as if merely speaking of a ghost might make it appear. But, if torture is so evil, against torture essay, why is it so hard to explain why?

Let's try. Some say a society that allows torture loses its soul and brings shame on its members, against torture essay. This is true, against torture essay, but it explains nothing—at least no more than calling murder wrong because it makes you a bad person. A line often heard is that torture does not work.

Never mind the fragility of a proposition that is both unprovable and falsifiable. Even if true, this claim is a gift to the torturers: "Make it work, Mr Inquisitor, and the moral turf is yours. Consequentialism is thin gruel against torture. Beware of the against torture essay that ends with the words, "therefore torture is evil. This brings us to the deontological perspective. Do we recoil from torture because it treats a person only as a means to an end?

It is a principled view that might account for our rational rejection of torture, but Kant's Categorical Imperative is too much at variance with Anglo-American norms to explain the instinctive revulsion the practice commonly elicits. As the death penalty illustrates, note that popularity does not contradict abhorrence. In his paeans to torture, Dershowitz is merely echoing Bentham and, beyond it, the reigning utilitarianism of our time, which, from conditional welfare to advertising, routinely flouts Kantian ethics.

And yet, is there a doubt that the wrongness of torture finds its source, not in a holy book or in the final link of a chain of observations, but deep in humanity's moral intuition? On this we all agree. Or do we? Few would argue that waterboarding Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was worse than shooting him in the head. Yet killing does not make us wince the way torture does.

Could it be the excruciating pain? Baby Mohammed lost both legs during Shock-and-Awe and, over a hour period, bled to death stuck in the debris of his home, a horror entirely foreseen in its outline, if not its particulars, by the architects of the war.

The baby's pain vastly exceeded that of his namesake. Yet if Rumsfeld must one day cross Europe off his travel plans, it will be because of Khalid Mohammed, not baby Mohammed—despite the former SecDef's direct responsibility in the latter's agony, against torture essay.

Pain and death do not explain why torture feels so evil. Then what does? Perhaps the deadly mix of fear, humiliation, abandonment, and open-ended sadism that the practice connotes. The torturer never says, "I go home at 5. Pain, like relativity, distorts time. A root-canal patient can tell you all about eternity. Past a certain point, the victim's fear is no longer that he will die but that against torture essay won't. Torture is a window into hell, with a satanic god cast as a human sadist.

I believe one cannot grasp the role of torture in the imagination without integrating its metaphysical resonance. Torture rehearses eternal damnation. And that's not a good thing, because hell scares the hell out of everyone, even those who don't believe in it, against torture essay. To add insult to injury, the torturer reflects back to us a magnified image of that repressed speck of sadism buried in all of us.

This did not always bother us. God gave Moses not one but two commandments against torture essay lust, and not a single one against cruelty; likewise, against torture essay, Augustine deemed cupidity a more serious offense. It was not until Montaigne and Montesquieu that cruelty acquired a special status in moral philosophy. Torture offends us through its frontal assault on human dignity.

Beyond subverting free will into "anti-will"—your being tortured does not simply violate you: it makes you violate yourself—it denies against torture essay even more fundamental than freedom: personhood. It dehumanizes not only the victim and the torturer, but society as a whole. Or so our modern liberal sensibilities tell us. S hould torture be legalized in exceptional circumstances? The answer is an unequivocal no.

The ban must be unconditional. Because grotesquely evil behavior must be criminalized? Pleasing though it may be, this simple answer won't do. We must first examine whether there might not be a utilitarian reason to make legal exceptions. Even the most committed deontologist will recognize the need to test laws against their consequences. I will show that there is no room for exceptions by revisiting the three arguments central to the issue: TBS, self-defense, and torture creep.

I'll also discuss the criminal prosecution of torturers. The ticking bomb scenario TBS would appear to beg for an exception—see [9] for a definition.

I'll assume the usual conditions of imminence, gravity, proportionality, and certainty, without which TBS is not worthy of consideration. The first issue to address is consistency. TBS advocates often lack the courtesy to grant the same rights to their enemies. They remain oddly silent on whether, say, against torture essay, the Taliban would be entitled to torture captured American soldiers thought to know about imminent drone attacks.

There might appear to be a normative basis for the double standard. After all, we're the good guys and they're not, against torture essay, so why should we grant them the same moral latitude? That's nonsense, against torture essay. Our own code of warfare, such as it is, dictates that it apply equally to both sides—as do the Geneva Conventions.

Whether it should be so or not is an interesting philosophical question, but in practice this point is already settled. The legal issue hangs on the "rarity principle.

 

Your Essay: Against torture essay top papers for you!

 

against torture essay

 

The Convention Against Torture Essay. One regime, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, establishes a strong elaboration of norms against torture. Despite its efforts, many countries still outright reject its policies against torture while other countries openly accept them, but. The Case Against torture essaysMichael Levin is a Professor of Philosophy at the City College of New York and the Graduate center, City University of New York. He is well known in Libertarian circles and has written much about social issues in the US, especially feminism, race, crime, and other uno. Supermax incarceration and prison rape can be construed as institutionalized forms of torture. For the purpose of this essay, however, I narrow down the definition to the forced exchange of information for the relief of unbearable pain. Much like slavery, torture is coerced trade. It must be an integral part of the fight against torture.