David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):193-208 (2005)
Despite the fact that torture of prisoners has been condemned by every major document in international law, it has seemed to some, especially those in the Bush Administration, that terrorism creates a special case for how prisoners are to be treated. The prisoner may belong to a “cell” of those who have committed themselves to the use of tactics that risk horrible consequences for many innocent people. The prisoner may have information about future attacks on civilian populations that could, if learned, be instrumental in the prevention of these attacks. Nonetheless, I will argue that normally even suspected international terrorists should be treated humanely in that they are not subject to torture when captured and imprisoned. Our humanity demands as much.I will ask what it is about humanity that might restrict or prohibit the use of torture and other forms of physical coercion in the treatment of prisoners. I will attempt to explain why torture has been so roundly condemned and yet why torture, especially in ticking time-bomb cases, has been seen as justifiable. In section 1, I argue that humane treatment should be seen as the centerpiece of international humanitarian law. In section 2, I discuss a 1999 case from Israel concerning soldiers who committed torture to obtain information from suspected terrorists in the Occupied Territories. In section 3, I discuss how the principle of proportionality complicates the picture, and end with some conclusions about what restrictions should be recognized in times of war, concerning what are sometimes called “the laws of humanity.”
|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
Uwe Steinhoff (2006). Torture - the Case for Dirty Harry and Against Alan Dershowitz. Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (3):337-353.
Bernard G. Prusak (2007). The Ticking Time Bomb Case for Torture. Social Philosophy Today 23:201-209.
Yuval Ginbar (2008). Why Not Torture Terrorists?: Moral, Practical, and Legal Aspects of the 'Ticking Bomb' Justification for Torture. OUP Oxford.
Michael Davis (2008). Torturing Professions. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 22 (2):243-263.
J. Jeremy Wisnewski (2008). It's About Time: Defusing the Ticking Bomb Argument. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 22 (1):103-116.
Andrew Mumford (2012). Minimum Force Meets Brutality: Detention, Interrogation and Torture in British Counter-Insurgency Campaigns. Journal of Military Ethics 11 (1):10-25.
Jean Maria Arrigo (2004). A Utilitarian Argument Against Torture Interrogation of Terrorists. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (3):543-572.
Christopher J. Einolf (2007). The Fall and Rise of Torture: A Comparative and Historical Analysis. Sociological Theory 25 (2):101 - 121.
Rumee Ahmed (2011). The Lash is Mightier Than the Sword1: Torture and Citizenry in Medieval Muslim Jurisprudence. Journal of Religious Ethics 39 (4):606-612.
Christine E. Gudorf (2011). Feminist Approaches to Religion and Torture. Journal of Religious Ethics 39 (4):613-621.
Chiara Lepora & Joseph Millum (2011). The Tortured Patient: A Medical Dilemma. Hastings Center Report 41 (3):38-47.
Christopher W. Tindale (2005). Tragic Choices. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):209-222.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads17 ( #216,517 of 1,906,923 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #200,756 of 1,906,923 )
How can I increase my downloads?