David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
We live in times when, as Conor Gearty has pointed out, ‘legal scholars in the US are being taken seriously when they float the idea of torture warrants as a reform to what they see as the unacceptably uncodified system of arbitrary torture that they believe currently prevails’. And he is right when he goes on to add that ‘This is like reacting to a series of police killings with proposals to reform the law on homicide so as to sanction officially approved pre-trial executions.' It is because the general public is taking these academics seriously that there is an urgent need to expose how spurious their ideologically driven arguments are. The “respectability” they confer on the argument that so-called ticking bombs justify torture, and that it had therefore better be regulated, needs to be countered. Otherwise there is a real danger that western politicians will succeed in persuading us to go along with them when they insist that another basic freedom – freedom from torture – is yet one more value we must abandon in the endless “war on terrorism”. It is a short road from legalising torture intended to gain information to accepting torture as a legitimate weapon and for all sorts of purposes. The “intellectual respectability” conferred by the academy is essential for that enterprise. Thus, since Alan Dershowitz’s carefully constructed proposal to introduce torture warrants is both the most prominent and the most sophisticated of today’s attempts to make torture respectable, it is his proposal we need to focus on. In the Introduction, I say something about both the intellectual and the political contexts of the so-called ticking bomb scenario that is the basis of these proposals. In chapter two I argue that the “ticking bomb” scenario remains in crucial respects a fantasy; and that the grounds it is said to offer for justifying interrogational torture so as to avoid a putative catastrophe are spurious. In chapter three I argue that, whatever you think of those arguments, the consequences of legalising interrogational torture, and thus institutionalising it, would be so disastrous as to outweigh any such catastrophes anyway. Finally, in chapter four, I draw together what the details of my argument imply about torture in general and interrogational torture in particular; and about why any even semi-decent society must abhor torture -– in all circumstances, always, everywhere
|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
Per Sandin & Misse Wester (2009). The Moral Black Hole. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (3):291 - 301.
Per Sandin (2009). Supreme Emergencies Without the Bad Guys. Philosophia 37 (1):153-167.
Rudolf Schuessler (2013). Violating Strict Deontological Constraints: Excuse or Pardon? Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-15.
Similar books and articles
J. Jeremy Wisnewski (2008). It's About Time: Defusing the Ticking Bomb Argument. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 22 (1):103-116.
Uwe Steinhoff (2006). Torture - the Case for Dirty Harry and Against Alan Dershowitz. Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (3):337-353.
Christopher W. Tindale (2005). Tragic Choices. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):209-222.
Eric M. Rovie (2009). Tortured Knowledge. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (2):315-333.
Yuval Ginbar (2010). Why Not Torture Terrorists?: Moral, Practical, and Legal Aspects of the 'Ticking Bomb' Justification for Torture. OUP Oxford.
Bernard G. Prusak (2007). The Ticking Time Bomb Case for Torture. Social Philosophy Today 23:201-209.
Matthew R. Silliman & David Kenneth Johnson (2007). Tortured Ethics. Social Philosophy Today 23:211-222.
Fritz Allhoff (2006). A Defense of Torture: Separation of Cases, Ticking Time-Bombs, and Moral Justification. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):243-264.
Youngjae Lee (2008). The Defense of Necessity and Powers of the Government. Criminal Law and Philosophy 3 (2):133-145.
Michael Davis (2005). The Moral Justifiability of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):161-178.
Christopher J. Finlay (2011). Dirty Hands and the Romance of the Ticking Bomb Terrorist: A Humean Account. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14 (4):421-442.
Fritz Allhoff (2005). A Defense of Torture. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):243-264.
Added to index2012-05-17
Total downloads183 ( #5,904 of 1,699,684 )
Recent downloads (6 months)158 ( #384 of 1,699,684 )
How can I increase my downloads?