Comment

Changelog: On Torture

336
Bob Levin11/04/2010 3:45:56 pm PDT

re: #17 researchok

I agree. Even if we can go so far as eliminating the inclination to waterboard, the rules of warfare sometimes require that one side gets information that is accurate, and that they get it very quickly.

The ticking bomb analogy is not about a bomb ticking. It is about a situation where many lives are in immediate danger, and that a certain bit of information can save those lives. It’s not difficult to imagine such a situation arising during a war.

There really isn’t a way out of this without cracking morals. Battlefield morality is very simple, to survive. The only other option is to perish.

Nevertheless, humans have devoted quite a bit of thought to methods of fighting that minimize the number of moral positions that must fall by the wayside. There have been any number of technological innovations that, taken in total, minimize the number of casualties on both sides.

The best way to avoid even the consideration of torture is to have such reliable and remarkable methods of getting information that events never lead to the ‘ticking bomb’ scenario. However, it’s nearly impossible to carry this out perfectly.

Many war movies, actual war stories, and certainly every spy story revolve around information, disinformation, and crisis. I don’t believe this is conflating reality and fiction.

When someone is coming to kill you or many people in your country—it’s very hard to get them to agree to use the Marquis of Queensbury rules. That is, you’re not going to get them to agree to play fair and help you to save lives.