Torture is one of the most extreme methods of eliciting information; unfortunately, it has been used for centuries and is still prevalent worldwide.
Thesis: Counterterrorism through interrogation is wrong and leads to false information.
Scientific Perspective
In 2006 the Intelligence Science Board, a civilian board that advises the U.S. Department of Defense on technical and scientific matters, stated that there was information to support the declaration that torture produces reliable information. Shane O’Mara, a neurobiologist associated with Trinity College in Dublin, analyzed the interrogation methods of the Bush administration. O’Mara refers to such techniques as “folk psychology,” and “are unlikely to do anything other than
…show more content…
Another serious pitfall of torture is confabulation (false memories), a resultant of the damage to the prefrontal cortex. A 2008 study showed that pain and stress retreat further into a murky situation where the detainee cannot tell truth from false knowledge. O’Mara argues that prolonged and sever stress does not support memory in the brain as stated by some. Coercive interrogations are unlikely to facilitate “the release of veridical information from long-term memory.” Indeed, torture provides the interrogator with false and unreliable information.
Unreliable Information
The act of torture can be traced back to the early history of man and the questionable validity of information extracted goes back as far. The third century Roman Jurist, Ulpian, wrote that information obtained via torture should not be trusted as some people are “so susceptible to pain that they will tell any lie rather than suffer it” (Peters, 1996). Nearly two millennia later, the discussion continues and the evidence more and more supports Ulpian’s assertion. Most torture victims will “confess” to any accusation if it will stop the pain. Although there are occasions where accurate information may be disclosed under duress, numerous victims have reveled that the truthful information that they did revel was interspersed with fictitious information to appease the interrogators to stop the pain (Conroy 2000). Studies have disclosed that as
Torture is something that is known as wrong internationally. Torture is “deliberate, systematic or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons acting on the orders of authority, to force a person to yield information, to confess, or any other reason” (World Medical Association, 1975, pg.1). There is a general consensus that there is a right to be free from any kind of torture as it can be found in many different human rights treaties around the world. The treaties show that all of the thoughts about torture are pointing away from the right to torture someone no matter what the case
I have been unable to deliberate on the appropriate alternative method for this particular dilemma. When it comes to the topic of torture, the popular attitude is that it is sometimes required. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of ethics and efficiency. Whereas some are convinced that it is an effective policy, others maintain that it is not successful practice. To further support the stance that the torture policy is not necessary effective, Army Col. Stuart Herrington inserted, in his experience, “nine out of ten people can be persuaded to talk with no 'stress methods' at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones.”
David Figueroa Eng. 101A Professor Stern 4/20/15 Final draft In conclusion, in discussions of torture, one controversial issue has been on the use of it. On one hand, the people against torture argue that it is cruel and unusual punishment. On the other hand, those for torture argue that it should be used for the greater good. Others even maintain that under extreme circumstances, it may be admissible if it can save American lives. My own view is that no one should be subjected to cruel punishment because it is not only illegal, unreliable, ineffective, time consuming, it also has too many flaws that could potentially ruin innocent lives. The definition of torture is any act, whether physical or emotional, or maybe both, is intentionally subjected to a specific individual or a group for many reasons. Most of these reasons that torture is administered is for extracting information from an individual or just for punishing him/her for a crime that he/she has committed or is suspected of committing. The use of torture can be used to intimidate a person to give information that may be beneficial for a nation. The use of torture has been used for many centuries. The purposes of using torture have changed over the years as well as the methods in which a person is tortured. One crucial piece that has been established that separates us human beings from barbarians is the prohibition of using torture. There are many reasons why torture has been deemed a crime now in society. There are
In contrast, some individuals may debate that torture and even some more minuscule forms of torture can be beneficial to obtaining the information needed. It is debated that torture has been used in a large portion of political systems in history, and that the “degree” of torture is a significant component when deciphering right vs. wrong. Moher argues that in a political system where torture is justifiable and legal, the torture used would be less extreme than what it is today (Moher, 2013). It is reasoned that different degrees of torture are more acceptable than others, in that some are less psychologically and physically harming. A
Torture has been a sensitive subject in our government and among the people of the US. The article “Torture is Wrong-But it Might Work” Bloche about how even though torture is not moral to some, it can still provide effective results because of advanced techniques and psychological studies. He goes on to say that many believe it is effective but others will say it does not provide adequate results in interrogation efforts. Senators such as John McCain (R-Ariz.) believe it does not help at all; however, other government officials, such as former attorney general Michael Mukasey and former vice president Dick Cheney, believe it does (Bloche 115).
The War on Terror has produced several different viewpoints on the utilization of torture and its effectiveness as a means to elicit information. A main argument has been supplied that torture is ineffective in its purpose to gather information from the victim. The usefulness of torture has been questioned because prisoners might use false information to elude their torturers, which has occurred in previous cases of torture. It has also been supposed that torture is necessary in order to use the information to save many lives. Torture has been compared to civil disobedience. In addition, the argument has been raised that torture is immoral and inhumane. Lastly, Some say that the acts are not even regarded as torture.
Indeed, waterboarding can actually lessen the brain’s ability to extract memory.” (Vivian Giang, “Neuroscience Proves Torturing Terrorists Won’t Keep us Safe”) There is scientific evidence that supports the idea that putting suspects in extreme situations only makes them tell less truthful things. Citing the work of the professor of experimental brain research Shane O’Mara, from University of Dublin’s Trinity College and director of its Institute of Neuroscience, there is little evidence that torture reveals useful
The author believes that “The secret of torture, like the secret of French cuisine, is that nothing is unthinkable” (Rose 176) and to illustrate this she uses an analogy where a man is tortured with a wheel and a snail is baked in its own shell. There are no limits in the world of torture and this fact may be a reason to believe that humans use their imaginary to accomplish the most horrifying things, but “torture didn’t come into existence to give vent to human sadism. It is not always private and perverse but sometimes social and institutional, vetted by the government and, of course, the Church” (Rose 177).
In a study done by the Department of Phycology at the University of Montana, study claims that “people's views of torture are often negative. However,
Long time ago, the Roman emperor Nero realized that a conspiracy of some nobles to kill him. Nero arrested the suspects and made a threat with torture. In Europe, torture was implemented to extort confessions or to punish
Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. (85)
Torture, (n.), the action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or to force them to do or say something, or for the pleasure of the person inflicting the pain. After reading “Torture” by Holocaust survivor, Jean Amery, it is clear that the above definition of torture does not provide an honest connotative definition for the act and effects of torture. Amery speaks about torture from his own personal experiences in both Auschwitz and Buchenwald, providing witness to the dehumanization of Jews. In “Torture”, Jean Amery truthfully depicts torture as an unimaginable terror, in which one loses sense of self, human dignity, and trust in the world, while gaining a haunted future.
The definition of torture is perceived differently to every person. In this dispute, the two opposing sides are generally immovable. Many claim that it is not an effective tool, it is downright wrong, and it just does not work, while the other side claims the opposite. The argument “The Gray Zone: Defining Torture” by Barry Gewen examines the controversial issues that erupt from the touchy topic of torture. Gewen writes a successful and persuasive argument for his favorable position towards torture as an effective mean for gathering information and halting life-threatening situations which he does through his use of strong premises, logos, and ethos, building him a credible and structurally sound argument.
Torture (Latin torquere, “to twist”), in law, infliction of severe bodily pain either as punishment, or to compel a person to confess to a crime, or to give evidence in a judicial proceeding. Among primitive peoples, torture has been used as a means of ordeal and to punish captured enemies. Examination by torture, often called the “question,” has been used in many countries as a judicial method. It involves using instruments to extort evidence from unwilling witnesses.
Ronald D. Cretlinsten contends that torturers acquire the ability to cope with the moral dilemmas of inflicting pain upon and murdering their fellow humans primarily through the processes of “routinization” and “dehumanization”, and also through the notion of “authorization” (191). With such as the case, an individual adept in the art of torture would necessarily have learned to be cruel, however, that argument neglects the very reality that many engaged in such activities are intrinsically perverse, and in fact willingly and happily do harm to others.