David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):243-264 (2006)
In this paper, I argue for the permissibility of torture in idealized cases by application of separation of cases: if torture is permissible given any of the dominant moral theories (and if one of those is correct), then torture is permissible simpliciter and I can discharge the tricky business of trying to adjudicate among conflicting moral views. To be sure, torture is not permissible on all the dominant moral theories as at least Kantianism will prove especially recalcitrant to granting moral license of torture, even in idealized cases. Rather than let the Kantian derail my central argument, I directly argue against Kantianism (and other views with similar commitments) on the grounds that, if they cannot accommodate the intuitions in ticking time-bomb cases, they simply cannot be plausible moral views—these arguments come in both foundationalist and coherentist strains. Finally, I postulate that, even if this paper has dealt with idealized cases, it paves the way for the justification of torture in the real world by removing some candidate theories (e.g., Kantianism) and allowing others that both could and are likely to justify real-world torture.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Fritz Allhoff, Patrick Lin & Jesse Steinberg (2011). Ethics of Human Enhancement: An Executive Summary. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (2):201-212.
Fritz Allhoff (2009). The War on Terror and the Ethics of Exceptionalism. Journal of Military Ethics 8 (4):265-288.
Benjamin M. Cole & Preeta M. Banerjee (2013). Morally Contentious Technology-Field Intersections: The Case of Biotechnology in the United States. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 115 (3):555-574.
Adam Feltz & Stephanie Samayoa (2012). Heuristics and Life-Sustaining Treatments. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 9 (4):443-455.
Nathan Stout (2011). Ticking Bombs and Moral Luck: An Analysis of Ticking Bomb Methodology. [REVIEW] Human Rights Review 12 (4):487-504.
Similar books and articles
Christopher W. Tindale (2005). Tragic Choices. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):209-222.
Fritz Allhoff (2005). Terrorism and Torture. In Timothy Shanahan (ed.), Philosophy 9/11: Thinking About the War on Terrorism. Open Court. 121-134.
Stephen Kershnar (2005). For Interrogational Torture. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):223-241.
Michael Davis (2005). The Moral Justifiability of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):161-178.
Yuval Ginbar (2010). Why Not Torture Terrorists?: Moral, Practical, and Legal Aspects of the 'Ticking Bomb' Justification for Torture. OUP Oxford.
Fritz Allhoff (2003). Terrorism and Torture. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (1):121-134.
Eric M. Rovie (2009). Tortured Knowledge. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (2):315-333.
J. Jeremy Wisnewski (2008). It's About Time: Defusing the Ticking Bomb Argument. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 22 (1):103-116.
Bernard G. Prusak (2007). The Ticking Time Bomb Case for Torture. Social Philosophy Today 23:201-209.
Fritz Allhoff (2005). A Defense of Torture. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):243-264.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads104 ( #10,707 of 1,102,785 )
Recent downloads (6 months)12 ( #16,260 of 1,102,785 )
How can I increase my downloads?