Torture

Torture is not a black and white issue. It depends on the scenarios on whether it can be justifiable or not.

I believe that torture is not justifiable in the means of terrorist torturing other people. It is inhumane and does not serve a person to human nature as a whole. It is very extreme and sometimes worse than murdering people. In order to physically torture someone for the fun of it is very sickening. Torturing people in this kind of way has no purpose other than trying to control someone. Controlling someone in this manner is not right; it is some sick pleasure people have that I do not quite understand. However, torture can be justified to help save human beings.

Torture is useful in the sense of torturing terrorists to find where a bomb is which is also known as the "ticking bomb" scenario. I believe that this is right because it has a definitive purpose--to try and help save the lives of thousands who could be killed by the bomb. Torturing in this way is preventing something worse to happen. In this case, the less evil of two wrongs should prevail. Torturing in a justifiable way is used as a last means of self defense; it is the last way to prevent something wrong from happening. In cases such as these, I believe torture is justifiable.

A quote from the article that helps prove my argument is, "In particular, it is difficult to see how torturing (but not killing) the guilty terrorist and saving the lives of thousands could be morally worse than refraining from torturing him and allowing him to murder thousands--torturing the terrorist is a temporary infringement of his autonomy, whereas his detonating of the nuclear device is a permanent violation of the autonomy of thousands." (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 14).

The quote above proves my point exactly. Temporary pain is better than everlasting permament pain which does not only hurt the victims but their families as well.

That is my view on torture.