Michael Levin “The Case for Torture” Michael Levin “The Case for Torture”. Michael Levin Argues whether torture should be legal to receive information from a criminal tential terrorist attacks. First and foremost, Michael Levin states “that even though torture is unconstitutional, it should be the primary last resort in some cases.” As a matter fact, there are cases that torture is not merely permissible but at times is morally mandatory. Michael Levin discusses the reason why Americans are resistance
A Painful Discussion of Torture In his essay in “The Case for Torture,” Michael Levin offers up entirely possible situations where he wishes to lead the reader to the conclusion that torture is acceptable. The dangerous situations that Michael Levin proposes, in every case, lead the reader to conclude that torture is a reasonable means of saving lives. All the hypothetical situations are posed to have dozens, if not more than dozens killed if we do not get someone to reveal what they know to save
“A Case For Torture” is an essay written by Michael Levin in which he tries to make a compelling case for the use of torture as a punishment during specific situations in the United States. Levin cites different hypothetical situations in order to logically prove his argument. His use of theoretical instances is meant to help direct the reader to an understanding of the applications of his policy on torture. The examples he uses include a hypothetical terrorist attack on Manhattan and hospital robbery
essay, “The Case of Torture” by Michael Levin, discusses when the use of torture on a terrorist is necessary. Levin provides scenarios of life changing events. In which he thinks torture would be the best method to save the lives of many. He attempts to convince the reader that torture is “morally mandatory” in our society. Throughout Levin’s essay he is vague on the definition of torture. He uses the “most excruciating pain possible” to help give the idea of how extreme he wants the torture to be. The
In “The Case for Torture”, philosophy professor Michael Levin attempts to defend using torture as a means to save lives is justifiable and necessary. Throughout the article, Levin provides persuasive arguments to support his essay using clever wording and powerful, moving examples. However, the essay consists heavily of pathos, fallacies, and “What if?” situations that single out torture as the only method of resolution, rendering the argument hypothetical, weak, and unreliable for the city of San
Paragraph #1 In the News Week article from 1982 Michael Levin an American philosopher and university professor, presents his premises and his conclusion to why he personally believes that torture is morally permissible. In addition Levin’s expects others to understand why such thing as torture is a permissible act that everyone should incorporate as a morally acceptable act. To commence, Levin presents his topic by presenting the usual though that torture may seem barbaric; however, he then diverts to
The Case Against Torture In “The Case for Torure” Michael Levin executes poor grammar, inadequate evidence, and ridiculous ideas to voice his opinion. The grammar is what is to be expected from a high school student, not that of a philosophy major. His facts are insufficiently backed up, and he provides no evidence, or rebuttals whatsoever. The entire paper is more of an opinion than an intelligent argument. Levin, a philosophy professor at the City University of New York, employs immature grammar
In Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture” he argues for the use of torture to save the lives of innocent people. Levin’s main claim is a claim of value, weighing the lives of the innocent against the lives of the guilty. Levin mainly uses hypotheticals to frame his argument as a way to illicit an emotional response from readers. This method is effective because he’s discussing such a serious topic and hypotheticals allow the reader to be immersed in his argument. He frames the discussion around these
Essay on Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture” Michael Levin, who was born in 1943, is a philosophy professor at City University of New York. Most of his works are related to philosophy such as philosophy of logic, language and science. The work, The Case of Torture, argued that whether torture is wrong in any situation or not. He raised some examples to support what he tried to say and in the end he wrote "Someday soon a terrorist will threaten tens of thousands of lives, and torture will be
In “The Case for Torture,” Michael Levin presents logical fallacies that originate at the authors desire to relate the importance of his message. Though his specific argument is a very plausible solution to a taboo problem, the manner in which he presents it has some fallacies that cause it to be unsupported Levin argues that torture should be used on terrorist in order to save people from terrorism. He further implies that this is the morally correct thing to do, because it ensures the good of