Is torture in Guantanamo Bay Ethical? While it may seem like an easy question to answer our country is vastly divided on this subject. There are countless parts to consider in order to truly be confident when answering a question like this. The circumstances alone can sway philosophers to debate on whether or not torture is right or not. I personally feel that torture is an unnecessary evil that has remained the same for ages. Throughout this paper I will demonstrate what has lead me to this conclusion by applying the modern problem of Guantanamo Bay to the famous philosophical ideas of Martha Nussbaum and Jeremy Bentham. What is Guantanamo Bay, and why does torture play such a big role in its existence? Guantanamo Bay is a US military prison …show more content…
However, this is unlike any other US prison. One of the main goals at Guantanamo Bay is to extract information from prisoners with any means necessary. This is done through various ways of making these prisoners lives horrible. Some methods include electric torture, sensory deprivation, and extreme exposure to the elements. This horrible treatment is looked at as legal by the US government because it is located on foreign soil therefore it does not apply to the same laws that we have in the US.
While people may see torture as a necessary evil in order to stop terror attacks, the ethical dilemma of whether or not this is morally right still remains. In the article “Compassion and Terror” written by Martha Nussbaum, readers are introduced to several ideas on how humanity faces and deals with terrible situations. Nussbaum believes that terror affects humanity based on its relatedness to every person. This means that if something terrible happens, it is more likely to have a bigger effect on somebody that lives near the tragedy, than somebody that lives across the world. An example of this is
…show more content…
In Bentham’s article “An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation”, he introduces the philosophy of Utilitarianism. He believed that as humans our actions are driven to achieve the greatest amount of happiness and the least amount of pain. He demonstrates this in his article by saying “Start with the thought that it goes the whole way: the condition of the ward is exactly that of pure slavery. Now vary that by giving the guardian the obligation that turns his power into a trust; it is the obligation to act in the way that is most likely to bring to the ward the greatest quantity of happiness that his faculties and circumstances will allow (subject only to the guardian’s being permitted to care about his own happiness and obliged to care about the happiness of other men)” (Bentham 128). Using this idea, he felt that humans strive as a whole to achieve the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people. From this idea stemmed his Hedonic Calculus. Hedonic calculus assigns two different units to each action, hedons for a unit of pleasure and dolors for a unit of pain. With these measurements you are able to assign value to decisions and their effects, therefore, allowing somebody to more accurately decide what is the right thing to do to bring this greatest good. This compares to Guantanamo Bay because this calculus can
For decades, prison has been signified as an unspeakably horrifying place for those who have done harm to our society. Nevertheless, in today 's society, shows like Wentworth, orange is the new black and prison break illustrate prison in an entertaining way. A way that is so detached from reality. However, in the article "Norway 's Ideal Prison," by Piers Hernu, he clearly reveals and gives us a vivid picture of what prison life is like in Bastoy, the home of Norway only prison. On the other hand, "The Prisoners Dilemma," by Stephan Chapman argues how in Islamic countries criminals are being cruelly handled and how flawed the American penal system is and needs to be adjusted. Even though there are many similarities in both articles on what
Guantanamo Bay has been in control by America since the Spanish American war.Guantanamo bay was used as a coaling station for american navy ships.According to” A Brief History of Gitmo” by Alyssa Fetini. . “The 45-square-mile site was originally used as a coaling station for U.S. Navy ships, under a lease drawn up in 1903”. This is very important because this shows how Guantanamo bay was used as something positive and beneficial to America.Guantanamo bay was then a “haven” for Haitian refugees. According to the same article ” A Brief History of Gitmo” by Alyssa Fetini.in the early 1990s “when it became a vital haven for Haitian refugees fleeing the violent coup that ravaged their country.”This is also another example on how Guantanamo bay was used in a positive and helpful way.Guantanamo bay has been through many changes and uses and has a lot of history behind it.
America’s Use of Torture in Interrogations of Suspected Terrorists Violates Human Rights by Lisa Hajjar
Capital punishment and torture are often looked down on in today’s societies because they are viewed as cruel and unconstitutional, but perhaps they would help in more ways then we would like to admit. They can be beneficial in many ways such as encouragement to be truthful, encouragement to live by the laws, and as a source of punishment. Capital punishment and torture are thought to be too painful, and the person doing the punishment is also committing a crime.
Consider the following situation: You are an army officer who has just captured an enemy soldier who knows where a secret time bomb has been planted. Unless defused, the bomb will explode, killing thousands of people. Would it be morally permissible to torture them to get him to reveal the bomb’s location? Discuss this problem in light of both Utilitarian and Kantian moral theories and present arguments from both moral perspectives for why torture is morally wrong.
In the world we live in today there is, has been, and always will be an infinite amount of controversies throughout society. Perhaps one of the most important, being that it could jeopardize our existence, is the debate of how to deal with what most everyone would consider unwanted. The members of the prison population can range from petty thieves to cold hearted serial killers; so the conflict arises on how they can all be dealt with the most efficient way. The sides can result in a wide range of opinions such as simply thinking a slap on the wrist is sufficient; to even thinking that death is the only way such a lesson can be learned. While many believe it is ok to punish and torture prisoners, others feel that cruel treatment of prison inmates is wrong because it is thought to be immoral and too extreme as opposed to deprived freedom and rehabilitation.
Imagine sitting in a tiny cell for the years at a time slowly but surely losing your mind. This is what many prisoners in the American prison system face today. Solitary confinement is when an inmate is isolated from any human contact, often with the exception of members of prison staff, for 22–24 hours a day, with a sentence ranging from days to decades. This cruel and unusual punishment is used by prisons daily throughout the country. Atul Gawande, a surgeon, public health researcher, and author for The New Yorker writes the article ¨Is Long-Term Solitary Confinement Torture?¨, successfully convincing the reader that solitary confinement is nothing less than unreasonable torture.
The motivation to torture is guided by gut feelings and “what if” stories. Using torture to gain information involves a tremendous amount of assumptions. The Torturer is assuming that there is an actual danger, they are assuming that they have the correct person as well as assuming their level of their involvement and guilt in the situation, and lastly by using torture they are assuming that there is no alternative way to extract the information.
The use of torture has always been a hot topic of moral and ethical discussion. Typically, the discussion is not about whether or not torture is good, but rather if there is ever a morally acceptable situation in which torture should be allowed to occur. Does a criminal’s deeds strip him of basic human rights and make it morally okay for him to be physically and mentally abused? Do certain situations such as war make torture acceptable? It is generally agreed upon that torture is a terrible violation of a person and their rights; the common thread among moral questions such as these is if there are any times when torture could be considered morally acceptable. In order to analyze this moral dilemma, an ethical system is commonly used as a
Tortured prisoners give false information. One writer writes “Many survivors of torture report that they would have said anything to make the torture stop.” (Mayer, 2005; McCoy, 2006) Another says that “We had people who were willing to confess to anything if we would just stop” (Andersen). The NY times reports that in 2002, A Syrian born Canadian named Maher Arar was stopped in an airport and was interrogated. He was later sent to a prison where he was beaten, tortured and questioned for the next 10 months of his life. To stop the punishment, he “admitted” to getting training in Afghanistan! A country he had never even been to. It was later discovered that everything that he confessed to was false, and was just a lie to stop the torture. Not only did you destroy someone’s life, but you also wasted taxpayer’s money! Imagine the amount of money wasted on getting planes to that area of Afghanistan where that guy was “trained” at. Or the amount of money that was used to fund this prison! Confessions made during torture are unreliable and are usually just statements to stop the torture.
Applebaum believes that torture should not be used as a means of gaining information from suspects. Applebaum's opinion is supported through details that the practice has not been proven optimally successful. After debating the topic, I have deliberated on agreeing with Applebaum's stance towards the torture policy. I personally agree with the thought to discontinue the practice of torture as a means of acquiring intel. I find it unacceptable that under the Bush Administration, the President decided prisoners to be considered exceptions to the Geneva Convention. As far as moral and ethical consideration, I do not believe that it is anyone's right to harm anyone else, especially if the tactic is not proven successful. After concluding an interview with Academic, Darius Rejali, Applebaum inserted that he had “recently trolled through French archives, found no clear examples of how torture helped the French in Algeria -- and they lost that war anyway.” There are alternative...
The features of enhanced confinement that consistently draw the most profound condemnation revolve around: the often-brutal forms and compassionless deprivations in which these units or facilities operate, the harrowing living conditions that inmates are compelled to endure, the resulting physical and psychological damage to body and soul, and the questionable legality of such confinement. Leading human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are regularly outing the United States for operating torturous prisons that house convicted criminals in the most deplorable and extra-legal conditions. (Marion Experiment pgs.
Torture is commonly practiced all over the world, but most notably in the Guantánamo bay detention center in Cuba. It is most commonly used on prisoners of war to obtain useful enemy information, but it is not limited to that as it is practiced in normal prisons and jails. After experiencing torture, people don’t possess the same mindset. These sessions of torment can give victims mental scarring, which often leads to damaging psychological disorders. It can also disable people’s ability to act and think on their own.
In his essay “The Case for Torture,” printed in The Norton Reader 13th Edition, Michael Levin argues that torture is justified and necessary under extreme circumstance. He believes that if a person accepts torture to be justified under extreme cases, then the person automatically accepts torture. Levin presents weak argument and he mostly relies on hypothetical scenarios. There is not concrete evidence that torture solves problems and stop crime but rather the contrary. Under international law, torture is illegal and all the United Nation members have to abide by those rules. The use of torture does not keep people safe, but rather the opposite. Torture has a profound effect on democracy. As the use of torture becomes normal in society, the right of the citizen will suffer greatly.
From a moral standpoint, torture is wrong and unacceptable. Many religious people are against this act of violence because they see it as a violation of the dignity of a human being. Humans have the right to not have intentional harm upon themselves from others. The ban on torture furthermore supports this certain right. Not only does torture violate people’s rights, but they also violate the demands of justice. In the past, many of our nation’s people have been tortured and we have had a problem with it; but when it’s not you the one that is being tortured, it seems to be fine. Have you heard of the golden rule, “Treat others only as you consent to being treated in the same situation? (7)” This applies very well to this problem.