On a great blog I try to visit often:

http://maverickphilosopher.powerblogs.com/

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Is Torture Always Wrong?

Paul Campos maintains that it is:

“Torture is wrong. It is always wrong, at all times, in all places, no matter what good one imagines might come from torturing a fellow human being.

“It is wrong because to torture a fellow human being destroys the torturer's own soul as surely as it destroys the body and mind of his victim.

“Here is a basic truth, understood by all religions and peoples who have not yet sunk into total barbarism: Mortality [sic] is only possible if there are certain things we must refuse to do under any circumstances. You do not "balance" the costs and benefits of torturing your fellow men, because it does not profit a man to gain the world if he loses his soul.”

(show)

I wish I could agree. I would like to be a good Kantian on the torture question. I would like to be able to say that acts of torture are always and everywhere wrong in virtue of their very nature as acts of torture. The affront to human dignity is just too egregious. I would like to be able to say that acts of torture are intrinsically wrong, which implies that any extrinsic consideration as to the possible good consequences of their implementation is simply irrelevant to an assessment of their rightness or wrongness.

But when we move from this abstract formulation to a concrete case, the matter appears in a different light. Suppose the police have in their custody a number of terrorists who know the location and detonation times of a dozen ‘dirty bombs’ (conventional explosives ‘wrapped’ with radioactive wastes) scheduled to explode in Manhattan. Does one torture the information out of the terrorists or not? Here the consequentialists have a strong case. Surely, they will argue, the good consequences of the use of torture far outweigh the evil of the torture!

Either use torture and save millions of innocent lives, or abjure the use of torture and sacrifice a million lives to a moral principle. Campos has given his answer: torture is always and everywhere wrong no matter what good comes of it. So, in terms of our example, subjecting the terrorist to waterboarding -- which Campos says one would have to be insane not to consider torture -- is wrong even if it would save a million lives.

I am afraid the situation is not as clear as the good professor makes it out to be. Think about it carefully, and think about it in terms of public policy: policy that applies to a public some members of which believe in God and the soul and some members of which do not. The latter will presumably not be moved by the New Testament consideration that, in Campos' formulation, "it does not profit a man to gain the world if he loses his soul." What if he has no soul to lose? What if this life is the only life? What if, on his scheme, being blown to bits spells the absolute end?

For Campos, "Mortality [sic] is only possible if there are certain things we must refuse to do under any circumstances." This is supposed to be a truth accepted by all "who have not yet sunken into total barbarism." This is fine rhetoric and shows what a caring and sensitive fellow Campos is, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Suppose one adopts a consequentialist approach to morality such as act-utilitarianism: one holds that actions are right or wrong depending on whether or not they contribute to the greatest good of the greatest number. On such an approach, one could easily justify certain uses of torture. Deontological morality is not the only kind, nor is one a barbarian if one is not a deontologist.

I don't have an answer on torture. What I am objecting to is Campos' irresponsible and onesided portrayal of the issue. I also rather doubt that waterboarding should be classified as torture, but that is a topic for another occasion.

-----------------------

Come on, Mephi. Can you get with this? I was thinking of the Carlie thread and all the 'complicity' talk about how we sometimes have to choose the least-worst of several horrible options. OK. So can torture EVER be such an option? If we'd pull the lever to direct the train over one girlscout tied to the tracks to prevent its running over 10 (or 100, or 1,000), what if we were on the train, couldn't stop it, but could direct it personally? Would we still drive it right over top the 10?

Tom

I agree, Meph. Divine torture would be fully informed and, hence, justified. But I think there are a couple of arguments that could be used against torture by humans.

1) Scripture nowhere seems to sanction punishment beyond just recompense--probably because humans don't have the wisdom to do more than that, and because power tends to corrupt anyway.

2) In many cases, humans torture to extract information. But it is not always known that the tortured one actually even has the information.

I think in most cases when extreme circumstances seem to justify torture to the public mind, a good argument can be made that those circumstances were the result of serious deriliction of duty on the part of the government. I'm always troubled when the government gets off scot-free while the "street" criminal gets the brunt of public anger. It seems like a case of straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. Because where much is given, much is required--which I take to mean that government officials should have a very high level of accountability. But we see the opposite for the most part--government officials have very low levels of accountability while those of us at the bottom of the food chain don't.

Post Edited (jefscott) : 9/30/2006 11:25:28 AM (GMT-5)

If the first premise “love” truly reconciles the entire cosmos, including satan himself”, then Paul Campos is absolutely right.

But here's the other question.  Given that there are those who don't believe in the soul, what do you say to the ASSUMPTION that it is better to kill one over 10 or 1000 or whatever.  Even if you DID believe in the soul, what if those 10 or 1000 were terrorists themselves?  If you want to look at the "situatedness" of the question, then it can become quite problematic.  When I hear that someone would torture someone "in a second," I tend to think this is JUST AS naive as Campos' assertion that it is always wrong to torture someone. 

Now, what if a person who is SUSPECTED of being a terrorist or is a terrorist but yet is innocent of having any relevant information and yet is SUSPECTED of having that information?  The idea of torturing someone just because we SUSPECT (even given that our suspicions may be right on?) that they have relevant information may be what is wrong at all times and places.

Also, I think when Campos is speaking of the soul, it could be said that one does not need to believe in the existence of an ACTUAL soul to say that when we torture someone that this affects us to the core of our being.  Do we not become a little more barbaric?  And if I'm correct, then it is this barbarism that we become on a socialogical scale is what I think Campos is concerned with, NOT religion.  But then, this raises the question as to the fundamental question as to WHY THIS (barbarism) should be wrong (intrinsically?).

Post Edited (BBBCanada) : 10/2/2006 9:44:17 AM (GMT-5)

Oh,

the link to Greg's Sermon...

http://www.whchurch.org/content/page_173.htm

It will be called...

"The Temptation of Practical Goodness"

Why wouldn’t you love the terrorist, power under him with love, why would you power over him more terror?

Well, seeing as we are speaking of ETHICS how would God willing that an innocent person be torture inform our ethics today?  I just don't see the connection.  I mean there is something morally wrong with torturing innocent people, hence our ethical question. It may be that the only reason we would even torture someone who is innocent would be for a greater good, correct?  Thus, it pretty darn well better be a "greater good" and we all know that that isn't always possible to see.  Greater good for whom?  For me or someone else in the immediate or some far off goal?

Thanks for the link.  Will listen to it as I do house work.  Talk about torture!