ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:13 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: The Ticking Time Bomb
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:23 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:43 pm
Posts: 1096
Here's <a href="http://balkin.blogspot.com/2006/10/torture-and-ticking-time-bomb.html">an interesting commentary</a> on the "Ticking Time Bomb" scenario as a case for the ethical legitimacy of torture. If you've been under a rock for the last two years, the scenario runs along the following lines:

<i>You have captured a terrorist whom you know for a fact has planted a time bomb in a major center of population. He is resisting interrogation, and you know that your time is limited. What means are justified to obtain the location of the bomb?</i>

The rhetorical answer is usually <i>any means, including torture</i> which is usually read as, simply, <i>torture</i>. However, this article points out two fallacies in the response:

1. In response to the scenario, we decided that any highly effective means of interrogation was justified to save a large number of lives. However, there is a substantial body of evidence and opinion that states that torture is NOT an effective means of interrogation because the prisoner will say anything to make it stop.

2. When most people consider the scenario, they balance the life of a single bomb-planting terrorist against the lives of myriad innocents. However, we decided that <i>any means</i> could be used to obtain information. And in many cultures there are things that are much, much, worse than the pain and death of an individual. Perhaps our hypothetical terrorist has a wife and children.
Quote:
Perhaps if we brought them into the room? Your superior warns you to steel yourself for what comes next. Perhaps the suspect will respond to mere threats that they might be put to death in front of him. If threats are not enough, however, we must be prepared to do the worst. Of course, in some cultures there are acts regarded as worse than death. Your superior looks at you. Do you understand what he is talking about? Of course you do. You are experienced in the ways of the [Ticking Time Bomb], of doing what is necessary to elicit information under the terrible pressure of a deadline.

Quote:
The TTB counts on eliciting a certain sort of response. Of course, “the president would have to authorize torture” to prevent millions from dying. But surely it puts a slightly different spin on the situation to imagine that you are the one responsible for making sure the interrogation is effective. And you will have to live with the consequences if you turn out to be wrong. What wouldn't you do to prevent millions from dying? Well, I wouldn’t engage in torture, child abuse, murder, rape and a whole long list of morally corrupt acts. And I’m willing to bet you wouldn’t either. Scenarios like the TTB are well designed to cloud our reason and judgment. For that reason, we should avoid them and concentrate on the ways in which we can realistically prevent terrorist attacks.

_________________
Always watching, ever vigilant


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:49 am 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 123
LIkely outcome of torture-based confessions in this scenario:

"Okay, okay... I'll tell you anything you want to know! The bomb will go off in Seattle, tomorrow!"

(The bomb will explode in Miami, tonight.)

_________________
<a href="http://dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_019.htm">"God is powered by irony."</a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:11 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:43 pm
Posts: 1096
[11:46] Winter: (yeah, the "ticking time bomb" scenario is basically "do you REALLY think torture doesn't work?"... the answer is "Yes, of course it doesn't you blithering idiot!")

[11:49] Thinman: And yes there's the 'torture doesn't work' answer, but I honestly hadn't thought of the 'Can you rape his wife and beat his kids in front of him if the water boarding doesn't work?' question

_________________
Always watching, ever vigilant


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:36 pm 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 9:44 pm
Posts: 134
Location: Screaming obsenities regarding untestable C++ software.
Let's say you torture the guy. The bomb doesn't go off. Your intel was wrong & the evidence fabricated. The prisoner was telling you the truth the whole time.

How big of a mistake can you live with?

_________________
"Their need for total domination and to bring the world to the edge of utter apocalypse makes them less-than-ideal Jenga partners."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:06 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 676
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Even being a little bit of a political aficionado, I find myself surprised that I have never even considered the torture question. I've been too busy with other things to think about anything terrorist related.

As stated, the scenario requires that we know for a fact that this person has placed a bomb in a major population center. We could, of course, almost never be this certain. But we must play by the rules of the argument presented to us.

If this is true, then the acceptability of the argument (from a moral, rather than legal perspective) depends on whether you have a mainly utilitarian or mainly deontological ethical (moral?) system.

As for me, torture is acceptable in this scenario IFF we know, as the argument states, for a fact that this person posesses knowledge of the bomb.

But this is moot anyway because ethics /= legality.

Edit: Hold it... I think I used IFF incorrectly...

_________________
And thus, Grey wins. He's creating worthless drama in a totally unrelated thread even after he's been banned. - Emy

We're not mad. We're just argumentative. And we live in a state of fluctuating contempt for everything. - onion, when talking about herself and shoonra, actually describes the whole of kyhm forums.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:50 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 5:00 pm
Posts: 5769
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
They're on Dantooine. The rebels are on Dantooine.

_________________
iothera: a science fantasy


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 12:43 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:39 am
Posts: 1756
Location: The border of civilization
Vaergoth wrote:
Even being a little bit of a political aficionado, I find myself surprised that I have never even considered the torture question. I've been too busy with other things to think about anything terrorist related.

As stated, the scenario requires that we know for a fact that this person has placed a bomb in a major population center. We could, of course, almost never be this certain. But we must play by the rules of the argument presented to us.

If this is true, then the acceptability of the argument (from a moral, rather than legal perspective) depends on whether you have a mainly utilitarian or mainly deontological ethical (moral?) system.

As for me, torture is acceptable in this scenario IFF we know, as the argument states, for a fact that this person posesses knowledge of the bomb.

But this is moot anyway because ethics /= legality.

Edit: Hold it... I think I used IFF incorrectly...

A good answer, but what if we don't know for sure that we have captured the right man?

My answer:
Yes. Since I hold to the utilitarian way of thinking, I must say that the good of the many > the good of the few. Even when we don't know for sure (let's say that our intel say 'we're pretty sure that this is the guy'), it's still worth a try.

Another answer is to use the torture in conjunction (sp?) with truth telling syrum. As much as I understand those kind of syrums, they damage the imbider's will while in effect, thus making him much less resistant (faster results) and less able to lie (better results).

_________________
Warning! The owner of this property is armed and willing to defend life, liberty and property.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 1:51 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 3:14 pm
Posts: 2045
RMG wrote:
They're on Dantooine. The rebels are on Dantooine.

_________________
All articles that coruscate with resplendence are not truly auriferous.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:34 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 12:31 am
Posts: 1587
Location: Bay Area
Gazing Rabbit wrote:
Another answer is to use the torture in conjunction (sp?) with truth telling syrum. As much as I understand those kind of syrums, they damage the imbider's will while in effect, thus making him much less resistant (faster results) and less able to lie (better results).


More like sodium doesntworkathol, m i rite?



(I am right)

_________________
<img src="http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f340/Tossrock/sigreducedjx2-1.jpg">


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 5:48 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:43 pm
Posts: 1096
Those of you who said, "Sure, torture the bastard", please read the post at the top of the thread again. Then consider if you can (for starters) rape and torture his wife in front of him. How about his neighbors? They might know something ...

After all, you've stipulated that as long as there is a potential benefit to a large number of people, it's okay. By that logic can't we waterboard 40% of the population to protect the other 60%?

_________________
Always watching, ever vigilant


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 11:28 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 4330
Location: Not a hellish, Onionian future...
Thinman wrote:
By that logic can't we waterboard 40% of the population to protect the other 60%?

My opinion here is much akin to my position on slavery. It can not be allowed if there is any likelyhood that I, or people I actually give a shit about, might end up as slaves or, in this case, have the shit tortured out of us. Also why I support a draft only as long as its other people being drafted.

_________________
actor_au wrote:
Labrat's friends can't run away, as they are only the skins of the people he's drowned in his own semen, carefully stitched together and stuffed with cooking chocolate.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:57 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:39 am
Posts: 1756
Location: The border of civilization
Labrat wrote:
Thinman wrote:
By that logic can't we waterboard 40% of the population to protect the other 60%?

My opinion here is much akin to my position on slavery. It can not be allowed if there is any likelyhood that I, or people I actually give a shit about, might end up as slaves or, in this case, have the shit tortured out of us. Also why I support a draft only as long as its other people being drafted.

As one of those that *have* been drafted I havta agree. Being drafted is a devine punishment for every misdeed you have done in the last dozen life-circles.

_________________
Warning! The owner of this property is armed and willing to defend life, liberty and property.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group