The Ticking Time Bomb: When the Use of Torture Is and Is Not Endorsed


Authors
Joseph Spino
University of Arkansas, Little Rock
Abstract
Although standard ethical views categorize intentional torture as morally wrong, the ticking time bomb scenario is frequently offered as a legitimate counter-example that justifies the use of torture. In this scenario, a bomb has been placed in a city by a terrorist, and the only way to defuse the bomb in time is to torture a terrorist in custody for information. TTB scenarios appeal to a utilitarian “greater good” justification, yet critics maintain that the utilitarian structure depends on a questionable set of hidden assumptions. Three experiments were conducted to investigate endorsement of torture when these hidden assumptions were violated. In Experiment 1, results indicated that endorsement varied as a function of the success likelihood of torture and its alternatives. In Experiment 2, people found torture to be more acceptable, less wrong, and more obligatory when the suspect in custody was described as a “terrorist” than when he was described simply as an individual, and when he was described as culpable as opposed to innocent. These results are more consistent with retributive justice than utilitarian “greater good” concerns. The results of Experiment 3 indicated that utilitarian decision profiles were not associated with lower levels of empathic concern but were instead associated with personal distress and the ability to transpose oneself into a fictitious character's experience. Across the three experiments, deontologists were more likely to reject torture than utilitarians
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s13164-014-0199-y
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 44,455
External links

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

What's Wrong with Torture?David Sussman - 2005 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (1):1-33.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Why Torture is Wrong.Bob Brecher - 2012 - In Contemporary Debates on Terrorism. London: Routledge. pp. 159-165.
Dirty Hands and the Romance of the Ticking Bomb Terrorist: A Humean Account.Christopher J. Finlay - 2011 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14 (4):421-442.
The "Ticking Bomb": A Spurious Argument for Torture.Bob Brecher - 2012 - Torture: Asian and Global Perspectives 1 (1):30-38.
Tragic Choices.Christopher W. Tindale - 2005 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):209-222.
Tortured Knowledge.Eric M. Rovie - 2009 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (2):315-333.
The Moral Justifiability of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment.Michael Davis - 2005 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):161-178.
The Defense of Necessity and Powers of the Government.Youngjae Lee - 2009 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 3 (2):133-145.
Defusing Dangers of Imaginary Cases.Joseph Spino - 2012 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):29-37.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2014-08-15

Total views
46 ( #184,702 of 2,272,244 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #410,656 of 2,272,244 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature