Is Torture Ever Right ?

[Peterkin]

5 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

Desperate times may call for desperate measures. 

That's what Pinochet said, sir.

[Intoscience]

5 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I hope it's been shown that you can devise a scenario in which people are painted into a corner that makes torture seem like a valid solution to the problem. Considering how many hoops you need to jump through to make it seem justified, perhaps this is a signal that torture doesn't align itself well with modern humanity. After all, we're slowly realizing that slaves were actually people who were kidnapped and enslaved, so maybe there's something undeniably wrong about torturing another person that we're not realizing... yet.

Finally, an answer that makes a bit of sense (at least part of it).

If the scenario can be possible then jumping or not through the hoops is not relevant to the OP. The mad bomber is a plausible scenario without too much complication. There's a bomb, many people are going to die, the person controlling the bomb is not giving up its location or prepared to disarm (seems a reasonable scenario so far to me). All attempts at negotiation and other lines of enquiry to providing a positive solution have failed. Things are now desperate and its looking highly likely that many people are going to die. Why would you not employ torture as a last ditch attempt to save lives? 

There is nothing left to lose!   

[Peterkin]

3 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

There is nothing left to lose!   

...except maybe your immortal soul (some people believe they have one) and maybe the civilization you just saved.... 

[mistermack]

3 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I hope it's been shown that you can devise a scenario in which people are painted into a corner that makes torture seem like a valid solution to the problem. Considering how many hoops you need to jump through to make it seem justified, perhaps this is a signal that torture doesn't align itself well with modern humanity. After all, we're slowly realizing that slaves were actually people who were kidnapped and enslaved, so maybe there's something undeniably wrong about torturing another person that we're not realizing... yet.

Of course, it's a matter of opinion both ways. But I don't think that it's anywhere near as contrived or rare a situation as you and others have portrayed. The Yorkshire ripper, for example, left plenty of dna around his victims. His MO was well established. And he was caught with his trademark hammer, and a knife having just picked up another prostitute. In countless cases, dna gives odds of billions to one against the prisoner being innocent. And quite a lot of them are happy to confess, but still refuse to divulge the location of the body. (for example) The hoops that you talk about are hypothetical in many cases. 

As for slavery, there was opposition hundreds of years ago. I don't know where you got the notion that we're slowly realising anything. People knew all that years ago. They just didn't care, back in the bad old days. 

[zapatos]

7 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

...and maybe the civilization you just saved.... 

Wow. Torture has a bigger impact than I thought it did.

Perhaps we can entice our enemies to torture someone. That way we can win a war without firing a shot.

[beecee]

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

 Better be on the safe side and shoot a few relatives than risk being assaulted by burglar? No, the probability is quite high. In a culture of guns, accidental shooting of family members is common.  You can't calculate the probability without collecting the information: that's just guess-work. Criminal investigation and prosecution can't rely on guess-work: you have to take the trouble of collecting all possible information, rather than just beat any old statement out of a prisoner.

Again, even in a gun toting society that probability is pretty low. Any guess work so far is in your hands. And of course as you have been told many times, all possible information and efforts, ( speaking of the kdnapper and preferably the mad bomber) have been made. Quick Peterkin, there are thousands of lives at stake, while you pontificate.

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

That depends entirely on who does the justifying and what their moral tenets are. Whether another person - more to the point, 12 other persons - accepts their justification will determine their fate. Whether they convince themselves will determine the quality of their sleep. 

I'm pretty sure if what I did lead to the rescue of a child, or saved thousands of lives from a mad bomber, I would sleep very well, and also that those actions would be condoned and forgiven by a normalised society.

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

It will never be unanimous. Some people have more absolute standards of morality - at least in theory - while others are pragmatic on a statistical basis - at least in theory. We have each explained our position. 

I say a normal society will do what is and condone what is best . On that I rest my case. And qualities such as morality and pragmatism, extend far further then what otherwise absolute strangers can claim on any forum.

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

Again, it's only in the contrived imaginary example that torturing the prisoner is a guarantee of getting  accurate information in time to stop the negative event. The kid might already be dead before your captive was brought in, or while you were exhausting all those other avenues. The member of the terrorist cell you captured may not know where his co-conspirator finally left the bomb, or when it's set to go off, or how to disarm it. He may deliberately been given false information and left as a decoy, or might lie of his own accord for the cause. You might get there just in time to be blown up with the other people, or waste time and resources hunting down false leads.

Or it just may work. But really, who has so far denied that it may not work? In the meantime you plaster your own contrived imaginary scenarios, without recognising the outcome most would hope for. Why?

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

In the very best case, extracting information from such a source in such a manner is chancy.  Of course it would be tried in desperation by many, probably most, agencies. But as policy, it sucks.

Not if it works! 😉 But hey, wait a minute! Didn't you yourself say you might be prepared to undertake that lesser wrong? The lesser wrong in this case being extracting info from a mad bomber or kidnapper by whatever means, rather then risking the life of a child or that of thousands, maybe millions of people.

 

3 hours ago, Intoscience said:

There seems to be a number of people who believe that torture should never, under any circumstances, be employed regardless of the risk. I'm interested in understanding this stance and the justification for it.       

+1

3 hours ago, Phi for All said:

I hope it's been shown that you can devise a scenario in which people are painted into a corner that makes torture seem like a valid solution to the problem. Considering how many hoops you need to jump through to make it seem justified, perhaps this is a signal that torture doesn't align itself well with modern humanity. After all, we're slowly realizing that slaves were actually people who were kidnapped and enslaved, so maybe there's something undeniably wrong about torturing another person that we're not realizing... yet.

Yes, plenty of scenarios have been given, all extraordinary and all with the proviso   of  positive guilt in the contrived situations. Outside those scenarios, all agree torture should be against the law. Torture is wrong, as is slavery. 

3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

As I have said - repeatedly: If. But. Maybe. It depends. I do not know.

All of the above. And i still don't know whether I would, or could, carry it out.

I'm sure you would, if all other avenues had been exhausted, and thousands of lives (or that of a little child) rested on your actions.

Edited February 9, 2022 by beecee

[Phi for All]

3 hours ago, mistermack said:

As for slavery, there was opposition hundreds of years ago. I don't know where you got the notion that we're slowly realising anything. People knew all that years ago. They just didn't care, back in the bad old days. 

OK, but I didn't mention slavery itself. I mentioned how we still justify the past kidnapping and enslaving real people by thinking of them as "slaves", like a commodity bought and sold, and are only now coming to realize how harmful even that thinking was. A slave just isn't the same thing as an enslaved human. I think there must be similar nuance wrt torture for our modern times, or we're not progressing.

[mistermack]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

I mentioned how we still justify the past kidnapping and enslaving real people by thinking of them as "slaves",

I have to admit you've completely mystified me. Especially when you say "we". I'm pretty sure I don't do that, and I don't know anybody else who justifies that. I'm sure you're making a point, but I just can't work out what it is. 

 

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

A slave just isn't the same thing as an enslaved human.

I'm just not with you. I'm not arguing, I'd just like to know what you're getting at. I would have said that a slave IS an enslaved human, so I can't follow where you're going.

[Peterkin]

5 hours ago, zapatos said:

Perhaps we can entice our enemies to torture someone.

They already do. Multiple someones. All the time. I thought the purpose of saving a civilized society was not to become more and more  like the enemies that want to bring down a civilized society. But we have failed: with this generally shared notion of "well, we have to do whatever works" and "if they're doing it, we have to do it, too" all societies are sinking toward the Dark Ages. 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Peterkin

[beecee]

6 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Finally, an answer that makes a bit of sense (at least part of it).

If the scenario can be possible then jumping or not through the hoops is not relevant to the OP. The mad bomber is a plausible scenario without too much complication. There's a bomb, many people are going to die, the person controlling the bomb is not giving up its location or prepared to disarm (seems a reasonable scenario so far to me). All attempts at negotiation and other lines of enquiry to providing a positive solution have failed. Things are now desperate and its looking highly likely that many people are going to die. Why would you not employ torture as a last ditch attempt to save lives? 

There is nothing left to lose!   

I wish you would stop making so much sense!

 

[Peterkin]

3 hours ago, beecee said:

Again, even in a gun toting society that probability is pretty low.

Sure. In the same year that grandmother made her mistake, a few other people made mistakes.

Quote

• Accidental gun deaths occur mainly to those under 25 years old. In 2014, 2,549 children (age 0-19) died by gunshot and an additional 13,576 were injured.

No big deal compared to mad bombers, but still....

3 hours ago, beecee said:

And of course as you have been told many times, all possible information and efforts, have been made.

Do you actually know what those all possible information sources are? Neither do the police when they begin the investigation. In the imaginary two-dimensional scenario, B/W answers work. In reality, they do not.

 

3 hours ago, beecee said:

Or it just may work.

And that's what you don't know when you make the decision you can't ever take back.

3 hours ago, beecee said:

I'm sure you would

Yeah, but then, you're sure about everything. I'm not.

Edited February 9, 2022 by Peterkin

[Phi for All]

52 minutes ago, mistermack said:

I would have said that a slave IS an enslaved human, so I can't follow where you're going.

So you're slow to realize that the words you use in this context are important.

I'll repeat it again, it's easier to commoditize slaves in our minds than it is to think about keeping enslaved humans, because you're removing their humanity. I feel similarly about torture. 

[zapatos]

52 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

...all societies are sinking toward the Dark Ages. 

You seem to be going through some dark times yourself. 

[Peterkin]

6 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

'll repeat it again, it's easier to commoditize slaves in our minds than it is to think about keeping enslaved humans, because you're removing their humanity.

 

IOW, it's a lot easier to bash in the face of a "pedophile" than of some skinny old man in a grey cardigan. It's a lot easier to attach electrodes to the genitals of "a mad bomber" than to listen to a brainwashed teenager scream.

It's a lot easier to make up stories and be sure exactly what you would think, do and feel in a simple, made-up situation than to face a complex set of unknowns. The only people who are sure are people who have never been in the same building with that kind of situation.

1 minute ago, zapatos said:

You seem to be going through some dark times yourself. 

Yeah. We all are. I happen to be aware of it.

[beecee]

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

Sure. In the same year that grandmother made her mistake, a few other people made mistakes.

Perhaps then you need to get rid of the criminal element in that/those areas, to reduce and/or eliminate those mistakes....you know, focus on the real problem, instead of the flagging support for your life philosophy. That would be excellent.

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

No big deal compared to mad bombers, but still....

Bring the gun laws up to an acceptable level instead of clinging to the old west and Wyatt Earp, Billy the Kid etc. *shrug*

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

Do you actually know what those all possible information sources are? Neither do the police when they begin the investigation. In the imaginary two-dimensional scenario, B/W answers work. In reality, they do not.

Sure I do. All possible information sources available. And B/W sometimes are all that matters, despite your reluctance to accept that. 

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

And that's what you don't know when you make the decision you can't ever take back.

Far, far far worse, and immoral then not utilising that last resort and killing thousands, perhaps millions of people, and of course the probable death of a little child.

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

Yeah, but then, you're sure about everything. I'm not.

No, not at all, I'm not sure if even torture would work in these cases...but I do know you would do it, as you have already hinted at.😉 and because I basicaly think you are otherwise a nice bloke, not withstanding your crazy unworkable life philosophy.😁 

Edited February 9, 2022 by beecee

[TheVat]

26 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

 

It's a lot easier to make up stories and be sure exactly what you would think, do and feel in a simple, made-up situation than to face a complex set of unknowns. The only people who are sure are people who have never been in the same building with that kind of situation.

 

Fair point.  Torture has some ethical parallels to meatpacking - most of us only imagine someone else doing the dirty work while we keep our distance.   (and a chuckle for "nice bloke")

[beecee]

32 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

IOW, it's a lot easier to bash in the face of a "pedophile" than of some skinny old man in a grey cardigan. It's a lot easier to attach electrodes to the genitals of "a mad bomber" than to listen to a brainwashed teenager scream.

Yes, as long as there is good reason.

32 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

It's a lot easier to make up stories and be sure exactly what you would think, do and feel in a simple, made-up situation than to face a complex set of unknowns. The only people who are sure are people who have never been in the same building with that kind of situation.

In general, I havn't made up any stories, and simply focused on the two thought experiments. In fact I have given quite a few real life examples of crimes and criminals I am familiar with, and their victims...check out the justice/punsihment thread. 

And I certanly hope I am never in any similar situation, because I do know what I would do to (1) protect any child, and (2) thousands of innocent people.

32 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Yeah. We all are. I happen to be aware of it.

Not me at this time. The world is what it is, and while I am mortified at some of the injustices around, I still have faith in humanity in general, and am doing my little bit in helping, including reducing my carbon footprint where ever practical.

Edited February 9, 2022 by beecee

[Peterkin]

Faith is nice. Enviable.

[zapatos]

35 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Yeah. We all are. I happen to be aware of it.

Yes, you're special.

[Peterkin]

4 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Torture has some ethical parallels to meatpacking

I'm nice enough to avoid eating meat.... But I'm pretty sure that doesn't count much toward my general unworkability.

 

Just now, zapatos said:

Yes, you're special.

 How sweet! So are you.

[beecee]

Just now, Peterkin said:

I'm nice enough to avoid eating meat.... But I'm pretty sure that doesn't count much toward my general unworkability. 

You have one up on me on that score. 😆 I love my meat!!!

 

[mistermack]

54 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I'll repeat it again, it's easier to commoditize slaves in our minds than it is to think about keeping enslaved humans, because you're removing their humanity. I feel similarly about torture. 

I don't think that makes sense at all. Slavery has been the norm for thousands of years. The common factor has always been that the slaves are of another race or tribe. They regarded any foreigner or people of a different sex or colour as inferior, not much different to horses. Even recently, in South Africa or the USA. That's why they had to use different bathrooms and bars. And intermarriage was either taboo or illegal.  That's how their humanity was removed. They were regarded and spoken of as inferior humans. Not because of the commodity aspect. That was a consequence, not a cause. 

[beecee]

31 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Faith is nice. Enviable.

Well its far better than giving up and becoming a doomsayer. 

[Peterkin]

52 minutes ago, mistermack said:

The common factor has always been that the slaves are of another race or tribe.

Generally, but not invariably. The most common factor today, as it has been many times before in history, is debt. https://scroll.in/article/898862/india-is-home-to-the-worlds-largest-slave-population-yes-slavery-still-exists ;  https://nyupress.org/9780814742969/white-cargo/

The masters still need a mechanism of dehumanizing and objectifying their bonded servitors - whether by dressing them differently or denying them specific privileges reserved for the free citizen, or simply branding them like livestock.

52 minutes ago, mistermack said:

They were regarded and spoken of as inferior humans. Not because of the commodity aspect.

Quote

Even recently, in South Africa or the USA. That's why they had to use different bathrooms and bars. And intermarriage was either taboo or illegal. 

Why do you think those laws were necessary? And why were they so often broken? 

It's the intent to commodify that makes the dehumanizing necessary: it's harder to justify benefiting from the subjection of someone like yourself than from the subjection of an inferior creature. It's easier to justify inflicting pain on a criminal or terrorist than on an adolescent. It's easier to deny shelter to a bum than homeless man. (Or, as e say now, "A man experiencing homelessness," as if it were like a cold or other temporary inconvenience)

And, of course, the ruling class has to convince the working class that they're different from and better than the slave class, the welfare class, the vagrant class - or else they could unite and form a much more powerful underclass that's harder to exploit.

 

Edited February 10, 2022 by Peterkin

[mistermack]

58 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

It's the intent to commodify that makes the dehumanizing necessary:

I think that's just somebody's pet theory, but I really don't think it's true. The instinct to dehumanise other tribes and races flourishes whether there is slavery or not. That's why it's necessary to remind american cops that black live matter.