The philosophical and analytical examination of the US government's use of torture methods on terrorism suspects in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks is far-reaching and compelling. What is your philosophical stance on this controversial and compelling issue?
Torture avoidance is recommended, according to the consequentialist perspective, due to its typical ineffective yield of accurate confessions, but is instead associated with generating inaccurate information that can negatively impact investigations, and even put innocent individuals at risk.
Taking a Philosophical perspective, it can be argued from a Deontological viewpoint that Torture is inherently wrong because it contradicts the universal ethical norm of treating everyone with dignity and worth, despite any class or conduct distinction, hence the means should not be defended by the end.
Torture avoidance is recommended, according to the consequentialist perspective, due to its typical ineffective yield of accurate confessions, but is instead associated with generating inaccurate information that can negatively impact investigations, and even put innocent individuals at risk. Taking a Philosophical perspective, it can be argued from a Deontological viewpoint that Torture is inherently wrong because it contradicts the universal ethical norm of treating everyone with dignity and worth, despite any class or conduct distinction, hence the means should not be defended by the end. Virtue ethics underscores the incompatibility of torture with the virtues of compassion, empathy, and benevolence, which ought to orient the moral decision-making of not only public officials but also everyday individuals.