Torture remains one of the most controversial issues yet to be solved. The contemporary world is pursuing principles of democracy and tolerance. All countries propagate such ideas. Ironically, at the same time torture is still an indispensible part of many people’s lives in both developing and developed world (Davis, 2005).
It is important to note that people in developed countries still resort to torture even though they may share democratic values. Moreover, certain ethical theories may justify torture. Nonetheless, the arguments provided are quite inconsistent. Therefore, it is time to make it perfectly clear that torture has no right to exist in the USA which is considered to be an exemplary democratic state.
Torture violates basic human rights and is against the law of nature. People have no right to torture other people even in the name of the overall good. It is important to define torture as an immoral practice which should be eliminated as justification or even silent tolerance of torture can have global implications.
In the first place, it is necessary to define the word to void any misinterpretation. According to the “Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment” which was adopted in 1984, torture is:
any act any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession. (Davis, 2005, p. 163)
Now it is possible to take a closer look at instances of torture in the American society. For instance, torture was a police ethics issue and it was referred to as “the Dirty Harry Problem” (as cited in Davis, 2005, p. 161). The problem was named after a “bad” police officer in the 1971 film. In the film the police officer named Harry tortured a criminal who kidnapped and killed a girl. In the 1970s, people tried to understand whether torture could be justified. Though, the problem remained in the terrain of police ethics.
However, recent events show that the issue has broader implications and it should be considered thoroughly. Davis (2005) provides an example of 2002 news concerning American soldiers who tortured prisoners and combatants in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and Iraq. The researcher notes that the government never provided a clear explanation of the events and their position on the possibility of resorting to torture.
On the one hand, the government “publicly condemned “torture” and blamed the well-documented instances on “a few bad apples” (poorly trained guards, rogue intelligence officers, and so on)” (Davis, 2005, p. 162). On the other hand, the government reported about new ways of interrogating prisoners and combatants, though they did not specify what exactly was meant by those new ways. Therefore, it becomes obvious that torture is still present in the US society.
Though it is officially condemned, it is justified in a variety of cases. There are still two camps in the American society. Some claim that torture cannot be justified and should be eliminated, while others stress that there are cases when torture is inevitable for the good of many.
Followers of such ethical theories as Deontological ethical theory or Natural Law condemn torture and claim that it cannot exist in the human society. For instance, in terms of Deontological ethical theory torture is unacceptable practice as it cannot become the so-called universal law.
According to Deontologists, torture “violates fundamental principles of humanity” (Bellamy, 2006). If torture can be applied to combatants, terrorists, prisoners or inmates, it becomes applicable in other situations and settings. In that case, torture in everyday settings should also be justified and any misdeed can lead to violence. Admittedly, violence leads to more violence. Clearly, torture is inappropriate and immoral practice which cannot exist in the human society.
As for the ethical theory of Natural Law, it also condemns torture which is unnatural (Banks, 2008). Again, it is stressed that torture violates major principles of humanness. There is no torture in the wild. Animals do not torture each other. Since a human is a part of the world of animals, torture cannot exist in the world of humans either (Banks, 2008). No individual can feel he/she has the right to cause pain and suffering to another person.
However, there is an ethical theory that justifies torture. Arguments justifying torture can be found within Teleological ethical theory. Thus, proponents of this ethical approach claim that consequences of the act define whether the act is rightful or wrongful. Thus, if torture is a tool that can make combatants or terrorists reveal important information which can save people’s lives, the tool can be used.
Sufferings of an individual can be justified if they will lead to the good of many. Of course, it is not articulated but it is still an important factor to be mentioned that combatants and terrorists are regarded as hostile aliens and enemies, which makes their sufferings less significant for proponents of the approach.
Nonetheless, opponents of this approach argue that sufferings of a close person or people’s personal sufferings would be seen differently (Banks, 2008). More so, effectiveness of the tool has not been proved as people often say anything to stop their torturers (Bellamy, 2006). Furthermore, there are certain pharmacological tools which can make people tell the truth. Therefore, the act of causing a person pain is not anymore an inevitable act of mercy to other people, but a simple sadistic act.
Admittedly, nothing can justify torture as no human being can cause suffering (physical or mental) to another human being. This is violation of basic human rights. All people are equal and no one can have the right to do wrong to another individual. Importantly, victims are not the only affected people.
Torture leads to a certain corruption of the very human nature as people causing pain to other people will inevitably lose major human characteristics. People causing suffering are likely to become cruel and violent. They can soon lose the sense of reality as it is unnatural to see (and cause) pain. This is also inhumane to make people cause suffering to another person, and, in this way, lose major human characteristics.
It is important to note that the issue has to be solved as soon as possible as the contemporary world needs clearly cut values. Globalization is one of the major reasons why torture should be eliminated as ideas, values and practices spread all over the world and people should focus on propagating real values and rightful practices.
Supposedly, torture remains an acceptable practice in the developed world. Globalization will contribute to the spread of such practices. Countries where torture was condemned can reconsider attitude toward this practice. Torture as a tool to cause pain to a restricted number of people to save thousands and millions will soon turn into a common practice applicable in all spheres of people’s life.
More so, this will have another implication on the global scale. The system of people’s values can become corrupted. People will reconsider values, which can lead to a distorted understanding of what is right and what is wrong. Justification of torture will inevitably lead to justification of any kind of violence. The entire basis of humanity can be reconsidered. Of course, this scenario is highly unlikely to happen as in the majority of countries people condemn torture of any kind.
On balance, it is necessary to note that the ethical issue concerning torture is to be solved in the nearest future as justification of torture can corrupt major human characteristics. This issue has been considered throughout centuries and there are a number of theoretical approaches to solve the issue. There is even at least one ethical theory that justifies torture. Thus, followers of Teleological ethical theory claim that suffering of an individual can be justified if many can be saved.
Nonetheless, it is important to remember that no reason can be sufficient to justify torture as it violates basic human rights. Not only the victim’s rights are violated, but the torturer’s basic right to live in accordance with certain (societal or personal) moral conventions is also violated. Justification of torture will inevitably have a number of implications globally.
It can lead to corruption of the major human values as well as corruption of the very nature of humanity. Of course, no society can afford such kind of corruption in the contemporary globalized world as the world is becoming small and major human values start playing paramount importance since these values help people cooperate and develop.
Reference List
Banks, C. (2008). Criminal justice ethics: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Bellamy, A.J. (2006). No pain, no gain? Torture and ethics in the war on terror. International Affairs, 82(1), 121-148.
Davis, M. (2005). The moral justifiability of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 19(2), 161-178.