Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
The ticking time bomb scenario is used when someone makes the sweeping comment that Torture is always wrong or the use of torture is never justified. You just need one exception to disprove such absolutist statements, and the ticking timebomb scenario is the one exception almost no one can argue with.
But the general argument for the use of torture in the war on terror is grounded on the following assumptions. Which one of these assumptions do you think is wrong
1) Al Queda can only pull off effective terroist acts to kill innocent people if certain information stays secret.
2) Al Queda operatives have varying levels of access to such information
3) We have captured and continue to capture Al Queda operatives
4) Many captured operatives won't want to give to our interrogators this pertinent information.
5) Not always, but in many cases pain and the threat of pain can induce people to do things they are reluctant to do.
|
You left off two additional required assumptions to make your argument work: 6) torture is more effective than other means of interrogation, and 7) we can't get the information that we need without torture.
Without at least one of those, you have not made a case for torture. Instead you have only made a case for interrogation, which no one would argue with.
Threaded Mode