guantanamo.jpgMost people probably believe that torture should not be a tool in an interrogator’s toolbox. Even when dealing with terrorists, if we stoop to their level of depravity, it’s argued, are we any better than they are? Plus, what kind of actionable intelligence are you likely to get from someone who is being tortured? They’ll likely say anything for the torture to stop.

On the other hand, when the situation’s context is brought closer to home, the decision to ban all torture, all the time, is less certain. If a man has kidnapped your young daughter and left her in a wooden box buried in the desert with little food or water, you might be tempted to beat up that man in the hopes that he’ll give up the location. How far would you go to extract the information? Julian Baggini gives this version of the torture thought experiment:

Hadi’s captives looked resolute, but he was sure he could break them, as long as he followed through on his threat. The father, Brad, was the real villain. It was he who had planted the huge bomb that he promised would kill hundreds, perhaps thousands of innocent civilians. Only he knew where the bomb was, and he wasn’t telling. [Brad’s son], Wesley, had nothing to do with it. But Hadi’s intelligence told him that, though Brad would not break under torture, he almost certainly would if he were to see his son tortured in front of him. Not immediately, but soon enough. … If [Hadi] didn’t order the torture, would he be condemning people to death, just because of his own squeamishness and lack of moral courage?

How about you; would you order the torture?

Order the torture of Brad's Son?


View Results

Loading ... Loading ...