Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The “Good” Psychologist, “Good” Torture, and “Good” Reputation—Response to O’Donohue, Snipes, Dalto, Soto, Maragakis, and Im “The Ethics of Enhanced Interrogations and Torture”.Jean Maria Arrigo, David DeBatto, Lawrence Rockwood & Timothy G. Mawe - 2015 - Ethics and Behavior 25 (5):361-372.
    O’Donohue et al. sought to derive, from classical ethical theories, the ethical obligation of psychologists to assist “enhanced interrogations and torture” in national defense scenarios under strict EIT criteria. They asked the American Psychological Association to adopt an ethics code obligating psychologists to assist such EIT and to uphold the reputation of EIT psychologists. We contest the authors’ ethical analyses as supports for psychologists’ forays into torture interrogation when the EIT criteria obtain. We also contend that the authors’ application of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Psychologists and the Ethical Use of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques to Save Lives.William O’Donohue, Alexandros Maragakis, Cassandra Snipes & Cyndy Soto - 2015 - Ethics and Behavior 25 (5):373-385.
    Arrigo, DeBatto, Rockwood, and Mawe take issue with a number of arguments in our previous article. We respond in four major ways: pointing out that they never really take on, let alone refute, the key argument in our article—that utilitarian, deontic, and virtue ethical theories are not only consistent with the use of enhanced interrogation and torture in the ticking time bomb scenario but these prescribe it; there are numerous other exegetical problems in their article; they make unsubstantiated claims about (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation