David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
This article is about two different narratives or accounts of torture. Each narrative signifies a certain view about the legality and wisdom of employing torture and coercion in interrogation. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the use of torture and coercion has become a topic of genuine debate, despite a sizable corpus of domestic and international law prohibiting those very practices. The first narrative of torture is centered on the ticking bomb scenario, the hypothetical that has frequently been deployed in the academic arena to overcome the absolutist nature of the legal prohibition on torture. Since 9/11, the ticking bomb scenario has also appeared in various official government documents and statements that assert the legality of torture and coercive interrogation techniques. It has also been replicated in popular culture, the most notable example being Fox's counterterrorism drama, 24. A second narrative of torture challenges the validity and usefulness of the ticking bomb scenario. Various academic commentators have unpacked the assumptions underlying the scenario. Certain government actors, most notably the Federal Bureau of Investigation and military lawyers, have consistently rejected the logic of the ticking bomb scenario, and opposed the use of torture and coercion in interrogation. This second narrative also has a popular culture representative in the form of Sci-Fi Channel's Battlestar Galactica. Thus, the same battles that have been fought over the treatment of detainees in the "war on terror" in the legal and political arenas by real world actors since 9/11 are also being fought at a discursive level in popular culture.
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Michael Davis (2005). The Moral Justifiability of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):161-178.
Eric M. Rovie (2009). Tortured Knowledge. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (2):315-333.
Matthew R. Silliman & David Kenneth Johnson (2007). Tortured Ethics. Social Philosophy Today 23:211-222.
Jean Maria Arrigo (2004). A Utilitarian Argument Against Torture Interrogation of Terrorists. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (3):543-572.
Bernard G. Prusak (2007). The Ticking Time Bomb Case for Torture. Social Philosophy Today 23:201-209.
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.
Youngjae Lee (2009). The Defense of Necessity and Powers of the Government. Criminal Law and Philosophy 3 (2):133-145.
J. Jeremy Wisnewski (2008). It's About Time: Defusing the Ticking Bomb Argument. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 22 (1):103-116.
Christopher W. Tindale (2005). Tragic Choices. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):209-222.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #82,914 of 1,781,360 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #295,020 of 1,781,360 )
How can I increase my downloads?