Ok, so I apologize for being a little behind, but my life is back in order and here I go. For my last blog on torture (for right now), I want to touch upon whether torture is the right thing to do in any situation.
I think there has to be certian things in line and in order, along with certain situations occuring in order to permit torture. I am not saying torture is the morally correct thing to do, however, I do believe when it is the last option in "crunch time" it is a necessity. Sometimes in life we need to put what is necessary in front of what is morally correct. If it is a ticking bomb situation, where information is needed immediately to protect a nation against imminant danger, then I would have to say torture is necessary, if all other steps have been taken and all other attempts to get the necessary information have failed, and torture is the absolute last resort, then it ought to be permitted despite the lack of moral corretness. I don't think torture is a necessity when it is not a situation in which a nation is in imminent danger and there is no proof what so ever that the person that is going to be tortured has no information. In order to torture someone in a ticking bomb situation, I think it has to be put out there that it is believed beyond no doubt that that is the person with information. If it is not believed beyond no doubt, then torture can not be done.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Although I agree with you that there are some instances in which one needs to do things that are not always morally justified, and in some instances torture, Im curious what your response would be to the claim made in class today. How would you overcome the necessity of omniscient knowledge of a ticking bomb scenario for moral justification of torturing? Would you simply neglect morality altogether or try and find some other justification for it?
Post a Comment