Analysis Of Alan Dershowitz 'Should The Ticking Bomb Terrorist Be Tortured'

Alan Dershowitz challenges the legitimization of non-lethal torture in his essay, “Should the Ticking Bomb Terrorist be tortured?” He claims that torture should indeed be legitimized for specific scenarios that require such action. The ticking bomb terrorist gives the example of a terrorist withholding time-sensitive information that could result in the death of innocent citizens, if not shared. Not only does Dershowitz challenge the idea of torture, but he also gives a probable solution that favors the legitimization the torture. He mentions three values that would have to be complied with by all three branches of government if it were to be legitimated, which Dershowitz does endorse. The arguments of the two perspectives discussed in the

Once torture is accepted, it has a high chance of going down a “slippery slope” as Dershowitz puts it. He introduces case utilitarian justification, which deems torture appropriate as long as the benefits outweigh the cost. He uses a hypothetical question posed by Ivan Karamazov that creates a scenario that exhibits the absence of limitations in case utilitarian justification. As one could imagine, during torture, an absence of limitations is not ideal. Karamazov questions whether a person would be willing to sacrifice an innocent child’s life to give eternal happiness and peace to all of man. This demonstrates the concern of a person doing anything to achieve a certain objective, as long as the cost falls below the benefit. However, Dershowitz claims that the worry of a slippery slope is simply an “argument of caution” being that all settlements with a single source of absolute control could fall into a slippery

Rather, when torture is acceptable, and on which term should be it performed? The argument lest authorization torture his an advisor Sharde presumption that torture is currently happening and will be happening in the future hence the the. Plan of torture and. Dershowitz believes in a formal, visible, accountable, and controlled system of inflicting that would ideally leave torture as a last resort. The system would begin by granting the suspect immunity. Then suspect the be would compelled to testify; if the suspect were to refuse to exchange information, the next step would be acknowledging the possibility of torture while continuing to give the option of immunity. In a case of a suspect refusing to exchange information, even with immunity, a judicial warrant must be granted to proceed with purposely elicited