It is important for the citizens of America to understand that the government does not use these medieval methods, and the reasons why some people are being subject to torture. He follows this up in his thesis by stating that torture is no longer unheard of. Would it be justifiable for instance to torture and violate the rights of innocent family members of a suspect in order to seize information from a suspect? In one of his examples, he verbally states that the mass murder of millions of an innocent crowd by a terrorist justifies the use an act of torture to stop such a brutal and barbaric act. But millions of lives surely outweigh constitutionality. If the only way to save those lives is to subject the terrorist to the most excruciating possible pain, what grounds can there be for not doing so? Levin effectively advances his argument primarily by presenting a number of hypothetical cases, designed to force the skeptical reader to question whether his opposition to torture is truly absolute. There has been an ongoing argument whether the use of torture should or should not be used in order to obtain information.
Punishment s addressed o deeds rrevocably past. He closes the article by saying torture would cause little danger to western democracies and predicting what he believes will happen in the future. In The Case for Torture, Michael Levin presents logical fallacies that originate at the authors desire to relate the importance of his message. The use of torture and its consequences have been documented in countries around of world over a vast span of time, and for a variety of reasons. Suppose a terrorist group kidnapped a newborn baby from a hospital. He believes that if a person accepts torture to be justified under extreme cases, then the person automatically accepts torture. Levin does not clearly limit the use of torture to these three extraordinary examples, but rather suggests that any number of cases may require the violation of individual rights, and thereby the constitution.
On first reading, the essay of Levine seems logical and his arguments sensible. Flagpoles, shadows and deductive explanation. Though I agree with Levin, to some degree, his essay relies heavily on the fears of people and exploits them to convince people into thinking pain is the only way. The Romans began to create laws allowing only certain subjects and crimes that could entail torture, but as time. Once you concede hat torfure s ustified in extreme cases, ou have admitted hat he decision o use orture s a matter of balancing nnocent ives against he means needed o save hem. Does this mean that a sociopath that cannot distinguish between civilized standards would not be tortured? Although the United States government deems torture unconstitutional, Levin validates torture being acceptable through the utilization of the rhetorical appeals pathos and ethos.
An investigation to uncover misuse of information by a chief executive of a. While both may pose valid arguments, torture is still perceived by society as an irrational way to get the answer you are looking for. There will be hard cases where the situation is murkier. After our group had studied and researched about the same case, our opinion is very different from the report team. After reading Levin's article, my opinion is his argument about torture was not valid.
These fallacies detract from the articles academic standing and arguably renders the entire case futile. By threatening to kill for profit or idealism, he renounces civilized standards, and he can have no complaint if civilization tries to thwart him by whatever means necessary. The argument is that by killing the murderer, you are not bringing back the victim that was killed. As much as people tend to think that it is something of the past, it indeed happens more than it is thought of. Torture is the action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment in order to force them to do or confess something.
Levin addresses the issue of torturing the wrong person. It conjures images in a readers' mind of any number of horrors, physical and mental. In doing so, he briefly explains an argument he believes people against the death penalty use. Throughout the 1990s Levin frequently wrote about supposed , biology, and morality for the publication. The force of pathos he puts into the reader is very compelling but does not fulfill the argument as well as it should because of the lack of good logic and reasoning.
It is just another hypothetical situation to bend things his way without providing documented evidence of a real life situation where the terrorist actually identified themselves. After establishing all this, The Case for Torture loses much of its momentum. The case of Michael Brown is a perfect… 1229 Words 5 Pages in progress. He closes the article by saying torture would cause little danger to western democracies and predicting what he believes will happen in the future. The hypothetical cases Levin uses range from very extreme situations, to a situation which we may sometimes see on the news.
And thus, those fallacies exist for a reason. I believe he did not provide any better example of this because it can very well make a reader oppose of the torturing right away if he speaks of a more gruesome example. Torturing the terrorist is unconstitutional? On the other hand, some people can also see that attitude as a good thing because they feel the person they are listening to actually knows what they are talking about. The motives are very clear as mentioned. They were then issued a uniform in which the main part was a dress with no underclothing to put on, the chain on their ankle, and hair covered with stocking cap made from a woman 's nylon stocking which made these men felt more like a woman than a man. Levin captures his readers' attention with his Isn't torture analogous to assassination and pre-emptive strikes, when used as an extraordinary, extralegal means of preventing future harm? This article mainly articulates that the use of torture is necessary in order to.
In 1982 the article The Case for Torture Levin argued that there are situations where torture is not. The case is one in which a newborn baby is kidnapped from a hospital. It is as though in his eyes, he thinks finding the right perpetrator is a very simple task. It is clearly an emotionally loaded sentence. Parents spank children to punish them and drive home the lessons of living good lives. Torturing should be banned not only in American, but also everywhere else.