Take a position on the use of torture as described by Bagaric and Clarke. Then post discussion notes for our class discussion on Monday. Those notes should consist of
1. The thesis of a potential essay. Please remember that the thesis is based on YOUR claim about torture and is not a claim made by B & C. Your thesis probably ought to play off of B & C's ideas, but the idea expressed should be your idea.
2. A set of claims that either support B & C or refute their claims. Those claims can get a bit complicated because many of B & C's claims are already refutations.
3. A set of arguments that respond to possible refutations of your claims.
4. Any evidence that you can drum up supporting your claims and possible responses to refutations of your claim.
As usual, have your notes posted by Thursday, 9-22, at 5 PM so that the rest of the class and I can have a chance to read them before our class discussion on Friday, 9-23. Also, please bring a hard copy (or a suitable way of reading your notes via electronic device) to class. You'll do better in the class discussion if you have your notes in front of you.
Kendall Kaiser
ReplyDelete- Torture is only necessary to a person who is killing massive amounts of innocent people (ex: Hitler & Osama Bin Laden).
- I also believe that people should become tortured for hurting innocent people. If there is rape involved, a serial killer, or even a poacher of a near extinct animal.
- I do not believe in torture at all, but there are some times where it is necessary.
- There also is necessary torture if one has important information affiliated with terrorism or other crimes along those lines.
I believe that torture is justifiable when the suspect’s noncompliance does not allow for another response.
ReplyDelete-The suspect committed a serious act or is withholding important information thus some action has to be taken.
-There cannot always be a situation in which nobody gets hurt when one side is noncompliant.
-When torture is used, you are trying to persuade the suspect as opposed to killing them.
-If there is a hostage, the hostage’s rights matter more because the hostage is not as likely to cause harm to others later but the aggressor is presently threatening to harm others.
Tyler Knoth
ReplyDeletePA#9
More than just on the battlefield
Doctors
Is it really them?
Parents
Some religions believe that only God will heal and deny any use of medication
Amputee coalition
Ongoing torture
Phantom limb
Counter
Not all need medication
There are other ways than mediction
Curtis Duren
ReplyDeleteENG 105
Prof. Burns
22 September 2016
Torture should be used only as means to an end and only in the extreme cases.
• I don’t believe torture should be an acceptable way to get information for regular cases but to stop those who are killing innocent people but with people like terrorist, i.e. ISIS that may be the only way to get information.
• I also think there needs to be some acceptance of the use of torture if our soldiers and others are being tortured to get to those calling the shots.
• However, accepting the use of torture even in extreme cases may lead to innocent people being tortured and I don’t necessarily agree with that.
Torture: When The Unthinkable Is Morally Permissible
ReplyDeleteThesis: I personally agree with Bagaric and Clarke’s argument in “Torture: When The Unthinkable Is Morally Permissible,” where they argue that torture should be morally permissible on the basis that it would help save more people than it would cause harm to individuals, but that the use of torture would have to be regulated to prevent it from getting out of hand in more everyday situations.
Claims:
Torture should be admissible in situations in which, and only in which, the officials have sufficient evidence against the suspect in question, or the risk to numbers of innocent people is too great that it outweighs the possible adverse effects to the suspect.
Torture should be regulated by international law if it's meant to be used in many different situations that span across the globe, as to avoid causing any possible national conflicts over the use torture as means to gain information.
Arguments against Refutations:
Torture could be used to prevent situations where there is a suspicious person whose activities could indicate premeditation for incidents like shootings or bombings.
Suspicious activity in the Orlando Nightclub Shooting shooter
Already being monitored by officials
There are many different types of activities that countries engage in internationally that cause international conflict that prevent greater damage to innocents, so adding torture shouldn’t cause any more conflict if it is regulated by international law.
“Governments around the world are two-faced on torture – prohibiting it in law, but facilitating it in practice” says Salil Shetty, Amnesty International’s Secretary General, speaking at the launch of their new ‘Stop Torture’ campaign.
Surveys conducted by Amnesty show that large numbers live in terror of being tortured, with 44 percent of people surveyed from 21 countries worldwide saying they feared being tortured if arrested by police or security personnel. Countries singled out include Mexico, Nigeria, Morocco, Philippines and Uzbekistan.
Amnesty International documented cases of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in 81 countries in 2007. Some studies indicate that between 5 and 35% of the world’s refugees have been estimated to have experienced torture. In 2007, there were 15.9 million refugees around the world and an estimated 26 million people displaced internally by conflict. This suggests that the number of torture survivors in the world today may range from 2 to 15 million. These estimates do not include those affected by war or other human rights violations.
Among foreign-born patients presenting to an urban primary care center in the United States, approximately 1 in 9 met the definition established by the UN Convention Against Torture. As survivors of torture, these patients may have significant psychological and physical sequelae. This statistic underscores the necessity for primary care physicians to screen for a torture history among foreign-born patients and to effectively address their problems.
Torture is a difficult topic to discuss because there are double standards.
ReplyDelete- Some believe that torture is okay when it is justified
- People should be punished if they are in the wrong especially when their goal was to harm others or something
- Some in society would like to see good prevail and evil defeated even though it may conflict with their moral values
THESIS: Torture should only be a last resort in the governments actions; it comes down to the philosophy that one mans death is necessary, should it save others.
ReplyDelete-MUST have universal rules of when it is acceptable
-Must be strictly monitored and documented
-Should only be last resort; last step taken
-Research done into longterm psychological effects and rehabilitation
Torture should only be used in extreme circumstances as a way to save lives/protect the innocent.
ReplyDelete-Perspective of trying to find out important information to save lives not getting revenge
-Not necessary in all cases, only vital situations
-Examples include ISIS, Hitler, Osama Bin Ladin
Thesis: To hurt one to save the many is morally acceptable and should torture fall under this category, it should be permitted.
ReplyDeleteUse as a last resort
If the information could save many innocent lives
What if they refuse to give information?
What if the information is time sensitive?
Use less minor torture then build up to more severe things
Non permanent damage
Hurting and torturing, even if severely, is justifiable and is permissible in certain situations; however, it should be used as a last resort method.
ReplyDeleteIt could easily become the only and last way to gain important information, save lives of many innocent people, and stop terrorist attacks.
Some opposing arguments might be that the person conducting the torture will take it too far or hurt the aggressor more than needed, or that the person may still refuse to give up information even after torture.
In response to these arguments, there would be constant watch over the conductors and multiple visitations making sure everything is still being conducted in the right manor. The conductor would start with the least painful use of torture and only make is way up to the more painful ways once the aggressor refused to give information. The torture would never get to the point of where the person would get killed.
PA#9
ReplyDelete• Thesis: In a society where everyone aims to be socially and politically correct, a practice that has so many uncertainties such as torture should not be able to come into practice.
• How is torture going to not be justified if worse things are done to our soldiers
• If the person’s health isn’t actually going to be harmed then what is stopping us from torturing someone
• What are the constraints going to be if we make it legal
o Are we going to be able to torture children
o What about the families
• What would happen if we tortured someone and it ended pu that they actually didn’t know anything
Avianna Carmoega
ReplyDelete(not a PA) #9
-Torture is never an effective way to solve a problem or get information
-There are always more things you could do than to torture someone
-"Given the choice of inflicting a relatively small level of harm on a wrongdoer, and saving an innocent person…" Torture is not a "small level of harm".
-There are many ways such as discussion or trade that can lead us away from torturing others.
-Many innocent people, including children are being tortured today in other countries.
-Torture is never justifiable
-We cannot say some forms of torture are okay because then it gets messy with what is right or wrong.
-Torture should not be acceptable in any case. There is always another way