News:

Nitpicky? Hell yes.

Main Menu

The Morality of Torture

Started by LegendarySandwich, November 28, 2010, 02:07:44 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Will

Quote from: "Wilson"Hurting his innocent loved ones would be barbaric and evil, by my sense of right and wrong.  Wanting to kill him would be appropriate, by my sense of right and wrong.
Both are, Wilson.

Blue have abolished the death penalty altogether, green have abolished the death penalty for all crimes not committed in exceptional circumstances, and orange have abolished in practice. Only red represents countries where it's legal. Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Sudan, and the United States. Here is a link to all the countries. Of the red, I challenge you to find one other than the United States you wouldn't characterize as having a barbaric or tyrannical government.
Quote from: "Wilson"How about this?  Bernie Maddoff.  Putting him in jail won't protect society from him.  His reputation is such that I'm sure he would never engage in shady activity again, and if he has enough money left, he would never work again, anyway.  He is not rehabilitatable.  He knows what he did and probably regrets it.  So .. turn him free?
You can't demonstrate that Bernie Maddoff can't be rehabilitated.
I want bad people to look forward to and celebrate the day I die, because if they don't, I'm not living up to my potential.

Wilson

Will, you obviously have way more faith in the ability of jail to rehabilitate than I.

Will

Quote from: "Wilson"Will, you obviously have way more faith in the ability of jail to rehabilitate than I.
Jail can rehabilitate when those who run and fund jails prioritize rehabilitation. The problem is that many jails, especially private jails, have no motive to rehabilitate, but rather simply to imprison and then release dangerous criminals back into the general public. The ability to rehabilitate can be seen in prison systems in other countries (Norway comes to mind) but it's simply not utilized often in countries like the United States.

Going back for just a moment, though, did you go through the list of countries which have the death penalty? If so, have you formed any conclusions about what these states generally have in common? Has that impacted your beliefs about the death penalty?
I want bad people to look forward to and celebrate the day I die, because if they don't, I'm not living up to my potential.

Byronazriel

Japan has the death penalty, so does India.
"You are trying to understand madness with logic. This is not unlike searching for darkness with a torch." -Jervis Tetch

Wilson

Quote from: "Will"Jail can rehabilitate when those who run and fund jails prioritize rehabilitation. The problem is that many jails, especially private jails, have no motive to rehabilitate, but rather simply to imprison and then release dangerous criminals back into the general public. The ability to rehabilitate can be seen in prison systems in other countries (Norway comes to mind) but it's simply not utilized often in countries like the United States.

Going back for just a moment, though, did you go through the list of countries which have the death penalty? If so, have you formed any conclusions about what these states generally have in common? Has that impacted your beliefs about the death penalty?

I repeat: You have more faith in rehabilitation than I do, and not only for Bernie.  Most of the people in jail are sociopaths, and the only way you can "rehabilitate" them is to convince them that it's in their best interest to follow the rules - and most sociopaths aren't amenable to that message.  The kind of people who end up in jail, for the most part, sure aren't going to be receptive to any moral arguments.  If they are taught a trade, that will make a difference for some.

I would be okay with abolishing the death penalty in favor of life without parole, but I have no moral objection to having the state kill a really evil murderer.  As far as the countries that allow the death penalty, there are about 50 of them.  Most of them aren't exactly leading lights in the morality department, true.  Should we go by majority rule?  Majority rule in the US favors the death penalty.  Maybe I'm just patriotic, but it seems like our criminals are nastier than those in most Western countries.  They are certainly more deadly.

One of the differences between our views on this whole subject is that you see offenders as just like the rest of us, except that they were placed in bad circumstances.  There but for the grace of God ..  But I see most of those in jail as defective in morals - lacking in empathy - lacking in concern for others - dangerous, with poor impulse control.  It's not just that they made bad decisions, their brains are different from most of us, in a way that isn't fixable.  They got that way because of bad childhoods, mostly, and maybe it's partly genetic in some of them.  Not entirely their fault, in a way, but we have to protect society from them unless they behave.

Thumpalumpacus

#50
Quote from: "Wilson"Hard data?  I'm not a student of torture science.  My guess is that there have been many such incidents, but I have no direct knowledge, and no desire to spend time searching for them.  

This would actually be the history of torture, not the science of it.  But to be honest, if you won't bother informing yourself, what makes you qualified to inform anyone else?  My morality won't be swayed by a "guess".

QuoteAbout the Guido situation:

1) An appeal to fear?  We're just talking here.  I'm not trying to frighten you.  See, there's this concept of hypothetical situations, which can be useful in figuring out where morality lies under certain circumstances.  And certainly there have been cases of people being tortured to reveal where the cash box is, even if I can't give you three examples of "hard data" on the subject.

Firstly, shitcan the sarcasm.  If you wish to have a discussion, discuss without being insulting.  Otherwise, don't whimper when you get repaid in kind ... because you will.  Secondly, if you cannot give me examples, you have no right to use the word "certainly", because that indicates specific knowledge, not "guessing."

Quote2) How can Guido know for certain you're telling the truth?  Okay, here's Guido's clever strategy.  He looks where you tell him to look.  If it's not there, Guido knows you were lying, and resumes his blowtorch work until you give him the right answer.  That Guido is brilliant!  It's the exact same answer to my nuclear hypothetical.  You look where the terrorist says the bomb is.  Obviously, you're desperately searching for a hole in the scenario but failing and looking foolish.

Unfortunately for you, this answer is silly.  Remember, the scenario is 24 hrs.  Now, what if the terrorist is smart enough to say, "Well, it's buried beneath Manhattan in a tunnel which we then refilled."  What are you going to do?  Spend 48 hours digging a tunnel?  That suits Joe Terrorist just fine.  Bomb goes off, infidels die, and he gets martyred.  But wait.  You don't believe him?  What if he's right?

You see, in a torture scenario, the tortured holds the high ground.  He can send you anywhere he wishes; you must disbelieve him at your own risk.  Or, as the example of Dr Speidel shows, he can hold out for seven months (against the Gestapo!)  And if you torture him too hard, he can die before you get the info.

Quote3) Some people can hold out, most can't.  According to Wikipedia, "After four days (of severe torture), McCain made an anti-American propaganda "confession". He has always felt that his statement was dishonorable, but as he later wrote, "I had learned what we all learned over there: Every man has his breaking point. I had reached mine."  No blame attaches to McCain for being human; he resisted to the best of his ability.

I'm sure that nuclear fuses act faster than four days.

QuoteRegarding Davin's refusal to torture a person who could reveal the location of the bomb in Manhattan, resulting in the death of one million New Yorkers:
QuoteDavin's response is not only correct, it is devastatingly so: if you must appeal to such an unlikely hypothetical to justify your actions, your actions are unjustifiable.

You and Davin lack subtlety in your thinking.   Everything is black and white.  No gray areas.  You seem to think that if there is an exception to a general rule, it invalidates the rule.  Nonsense.

Firstly, you have yet to establish any "general rule"; therefore, this is an inappropriate appeal to authority.  Secondly, it is a fact that this is an unlikely hypothetical.  Not only have no nukes ever been set off in New York, not only have no nukes ever been used in an act of terrorism, not only has a non-state nuke ever been constructed -- to our knowledge, not one act of terrorism has ever been stopped by torture.

QuoteNow you know that I said that I'm against torture except in exceptional circumstances.  And I gave a hypothetical example of such an exceptional circumstance.  And then you say that "if you must appeal to such an unlikely hypothetical to justify your actions, your actions are unjustifiable."  My actions?  What actions?  Are you accusing me of torturing someone?  You seem to be implying that I'm in favor of torture in general, when you know that's not true.  Please try to be more logical.  And honest.

That wasn't "dishonest"; that was the use of the general second-person pronoun, as in, "If you've had five vodkas, you're drunk."  It should be pretty obvious I'm not saying you're drunk-posting.  You shouldn't get so butthurt over what is, after all, a common English usage.  Believe me, if I thought you did something wrong, I will say so, directly, explicitly, and I will make perfectly, painfully clear what I'm getting at.

Just in case you haven't understood what I've said so far: I don't think you yourself have blood on your hands from the torture of human beings.

I will grant you the benefit of the doubt and assume that this was an honest mistake, this time.

Also, let me make clear to everyone that I'm not implying anything about your view on torture: I am merely restating that you are, in some circumstances, in favor of the torture of human beings.  Why does that put such a bee in your bonnet?

QuoteI speak as an Air Force veteran: the torture of anyone under American custody is a blot on our honor, and you should be ashamed to be urging it forward.

QuoteAnd I speak as a Navy veteran: We must be smart enough to consider each case on its own merits.

I take it, then, that you won't mind our fellow brothers-in-arms being tortured to reveal unit locations, strengths, and statuses?

QuoteTo be honest, what irritates me here is the refusal by you and Thumper to acknowledge something that's obvious....

If it's so obvious, ought you not be able to present evidence, instead of naked assertions bereft of support?  It's more than irritating to be lectured from someone who acknowledges not only being ignorant of the facts, but being uninterested in finding them ("I'm not a student of torture science.  My guess is that there have been many such incidents, but I have no direct knowledge, and no desire to spend time searching for them.") -- yet this same person expects me to receive his view as wisdom.

I'll take facts for $500, Alex.
Illegitimi non carborundum.

Will

Quote from: "Wilson"I repeat: You have more faith in rehabilitation than I do, and not only for Bernie.  Most of the people in jail are sociopaths, and the only way you can "rehabilitate" them is to convince them that it's in their best interest to follow the rules - and most sociopaths aren't amenable to that message.  The kind of people who end up in jail, for the most part, sure aren't going to be receptive to any moral arguments.  If they are taught a trade, that will make a difference for some.
Sociopathy isn't a thing anymore. Some people in prisons suffer from narcissistic personality disorder or antisocial personality disorder or something similar, but those disorders can actually be treated and there's a chance at being able to live with lessened or even no symptoms. Most people in prison, however, probably don't have a diagnosable disorder. They've ended up in jail not because of a neuronal problem or because they were molested, but rather because they grew up in a system which sets them up to fail. How many thieves or pot dealers in prison would you characterize as sociopaths? It's not like prisons are just for serial killers and child molesters, after all.

What the American prison system needs is to concentrate on rehabilitation. We need an army of mental health professionals to come in and deal with the prisoners in small groups and one-on-one. We need psychologists and sociologists to put in place systems which are designed to correct problems instead of just locking them away. We can actually see other countries have seen success with engaging prisoners and rehabilitating them (like Norway, which has a truly revolutionary system). The American prison system as it exists right now is in violation of human rights laws both nationally and internationally. Prisoners are regularly starved, beaten, put in solitary, raped, and otherwise abused in ways that are entirely inexcusable and that only serve to damage people more before releasing them again. It's like the Lord of the Flies, and the reason it exists is because our system isn't set up to rehabilitate. The torture of prisoners is meant to make them repeat offenders, which means more money for private prisons. It's the profit motive gone terribly wrong.
Quote from: "Wilson"I would be okay with abolishing the death penalty in favor of life without parole, but I have no moral objection to having the state kill a really evil murderer.  As far as the countries that allow the death penalty, there are about 50 of them.  Most of them aren't exactly leading lights in the morality department, true.  Should we go by majority rule?  Majority rule in the US favors the death penalty.  Maybe I'm just patriotic, but it seems like our criminals are nastier than those in most Western countries.  They are certainly more deadly.
Why is it okay to kill someone guilty of killing? Also, why do you think American criminals are nastier than those in other Western countries? I'm not saying I disagree necessarily, but if it's true why do you think it is?
Quote from: "Wilson"One of the differences between our views on this whole subject is that you see offenders as just like the rest of us, except that they were placed in bad circumstances.  There but for the grace of God ..  But I see most of those in jail as defective in morals - lacking in empathy - lacking in concern for others - dangerous, with poor impulse control.  It's not just that they made bad decisions, their brains are different from most of us, in a way that isn't fixable.  They got that way because of bad childhoods, mostly, and maybe it's partly genetic in some of them.  Not entirely their fault, in a way, but we have to protect society from them unless they behave.
According to the FBI, the most common crime committed my American prisoners is property crimes like burglary & larceny. These are nonviolent crimes. I think you may have the wrong idea about who your average prisoner is.
I want bad people to look forward to and celebrate the day I die, because if they don't, I'm not living up to my potential.

Thumpalumpacus

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Japan has the death penalty, so does India.

Indeed, and I noted Poland as well.  I wouldn't classify any of them as "tyrannical" or "barbaric".
Illegitimi non carborundum.

Wilson

Quote from: "Will"Sociopathy isn't a thing anymore. Some people in prisons suffer from narcissistic personality disorder or antisocial personality disorder or something similar, but those disorders can actually be treated and there's a chance at being able to live with lessened or even no symptoms. Most people in prison, however, probably don't have a diagnosable disorder. They've ended up in jail not because of a neuronal problem or because they were molested, but rather because they grew up in a system which sets them up to fail. How many thieves or pot dealers in prison would you characterize as sociopaths? It's not like prisons are just for serial killers and child molesters, after all.

There may have been a change in nomenclature - who cares? - but the basic defect remains: inability to feel empathy.  Mostly, in my opinion, because they did not experience the milk of human kindness as a young child.  And lack of empathy is not curable.  The best you can do is appeal to their reason (self-interest), because appealing to their better nature won't work.  Of course there are all degrees of severity, and somebody can be unable to feel empathy, but smart enough to follow the rules.  There are prominent people in many walks of life - lawyers and politicians in particular - who fall into that category.

I've actually done some work in a minimum security prison, so I know that most of the people there are not serial killers and child molesters.  But most of them have sociopathic tendencies and try to work the system.  And yes, thieves and drug dealers are sociopaths for the most part, by the classic definition.  I'm not against legalizing pot, though it's a close call, and I do think too many people are getting put in jail for drug offenses.  The nonviolent offenders who should be in jail, in my opinion, are career criminals - chronic offenders.  If somebody is arrested for burglary several times, you know he'll burgle homes when he gets out until he's caught again, and we have no choice to protect ourselves by putting him behind bars for an extended stay.

They grew up in a system which sets them up to fail?  Ah, it's society that's to blame!  Nobody's bad, it's society's fault.  There are no good and bad people, only people.  Newsflash: There are some nasty folks out there.  I think you're naive.

Ihateyoumike

Prayers that need no answer now, cause I'm tired of who I am
You were my greatest mistake, I fell in love with your sin
Your littlest sin.

Thumpalumpacus

The question is, is the tendency to recidivate inherent in the criminal, inculcated by the survival-first environment of proson, or both?

While I generally agree that repeat criminals need to be held personally accountable, be careful not to confuse correlation and causation.

Also, I completely reject ByronAzriel's contention that torture is appropriate as punishment.  I could not conceive of a surer way to guarantee the alienation of the criminal from society in a complete and final manner.
Illegitimi non carborundum.

Will

Quote from: "Wilson"There may have been a change in nomenclature - who cares?
Connotation matters. Here are two sentences:
"That guy is a sociopath."
"That guy suffers from antisocial personality disorder."
When you label someone a sociopath, you're removing an element of humanity from them, thus excusing abusing them. The reality, however, is that antisocial personality disorder may be caused by biological factors entirely out of the control of the person diagnosed.  Do you see how significant that difference is, between sociopathy and antisocial personality disorder? Executing a sociopath can be excused by saying that the person is essentially a monster, deserving of death. Executing someone diagnosed with a mental disorder, however, is more akin to killing someone with a mental deficiency. I see this as significant.
Quote from: "Wilson"- but the basic defect remains: inability to feel empathy.  Mostly, in my opinion, because they did not experience the milk of human kindness as a young child.  And lack of empathy is not curable.  The best you can do is appeal to their reason (self-interest), because appealing to their better nature won't work.  Of course there are all degrees of severity, and somebody can be unable to feel empathy, but smart enough to follow the rules.  There are prominent people in many walks of life - lawyers and politicians in particular - who fall into that category.
Lack of empathy can be treated in many cases. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. Cognitive behavioral therapy has a decent track record among teenagers and young adults who have antisocial personality disorder and even narcissistic personality disorder. There are also medications that enjoy success with people diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder.
Quote from: "Wilson"I've actually done some work in a minimum security prison, so I know that most of the people there are not serial killers and child molesters.  But most of them have sociopathic tendencies and try to work the system.
If you were in prison, you wouldn't try to "work the system"? I certainly would, and I'm capable of empathy. Desperate times call for drastic measures. If I were under threat of rape and torture every day, I can imagine myself, while still maintaining my ability to feel empathy, moving well outside of my moral comfort zone for the sake of simple self-defense.
Quote from: "Wilson"They grew up in a system which sets them up to fail?  Ah, it's society that's to blame!  Nobody's bad, it's society's fault.  There are no good and bad people, only people.  Newsflash: There are some nasty folks out there.  I think you're naive.
I'm not talking about blame, I'm trying to explain the cause.
I want bad people to look forward to and celebrate the day I die, because if they don't, I'm not living up to my potential.

Byronazriel

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"Also, I completely reject ByronAzriel's contention that torture is appropriate as punishment.  I could not conceive of a surer way to guarantee the alienation of the criminal from society in a complete and final manner.

What about lobotomies?
"You are trying to understand madness with logic. This is not unlike searching for darkness with a torch." -Jervis Tetch

Wilson

Quote from: "Will"Connotation matters. Here re two sentences:
"That guy is a sociopath."
"That guy suffers from antisocial personality disorder."
When you label someone a sociopath, you're removing an element of humanity from them, thus excusing abusing them. The reality, however, is that antisocial personality disorder may be caused by biological factors entirely out of the control of the person diagnosed.  Do you see how significant that difference is, between sociopathy and antisocial personality disorder? Executing a sociopath can be excused by saying that the person is essentially a monster, deserving of death. Executing someone diagnosed with a mental disorder, however, is more akin to killing someone with a mental deficiency. I see this as significant.j

I think there is a problem with the terms used to describe this condition.  I wish there was a term for lacking empathy.  Because as I said before, not everyone who lacks empathy and compassion is a danger to society.  In fact, in some professions a lack of compassion might be useful.  The word "sociopath" seems to imply some pathology of socialization, "psychopath" is the more extreme version, and "antisocial personality disorder" includes both.  I certainly wouldn't want to punish someone because of his personality, only for his actions.

QuoteLack of empathy can be treated in many cases. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. Cognitive behavioral therapy has a decent track record among teenagers and young adults who have antisocial personality disorder and even narcissistic personality disorder. There are also medications that enjoy success with people diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder.

I've always read that treatment doesn't work for sociopaths, except, as I said before, to appeal to their own self interest, which sometimes works.  Remember that just because something it treatable is doesn't necessarily mean that the treatment is effective.  This is from Wikipedia:

According to Christopher J. Patrick in his 'Handbook of Psychopathy' clinicians generally believe that there is neither a cure nor any effective treatment for psychopathy; there are no medications that can instill empathy, while psychopaths who undergo traditional talk therapy only become more adept at manipulating others.[7] However, other researchers suggest that psychopaths may benefit as much as others from psychological treatment, at least in terms of effect on behavior.[8] According to Hare, the consensus among researchers in this area is that psychopathy stems from a specific neurological disorder which is biological in origin and present from birth[9] although this was not what was reported by a 2008 review which instead indicated multiple causes and variation between individuals.[10] Hare estimates that about one percent of the population are psychopaths.[11]

Things got a little heated.  Sorry if I've been rude to you.

Will

Quote from: "Wilson"I think there is a problem with the terms used to describe this condition.  I wish there was a term for lacking empathy.  Because as I said before, not everyone who lacks empathy and compassion is a danger to society.  In fact, in some professions a lack of compassion might be useful.  The word "sociopath" seems to imply some pathology of socialization, "psychopath" is the more extreme version, and "antisocial personality disorder" includes both.  I certainly wouldn't want to punish someone because of his personality, only for his actions.
Maybe we should just say "lacking empathy" from here on.
Quote from: "Wilson"I've always read that treatment doesn't work for sociopaths, except, as I said before, to appeal to their own self interest, which sometimes works.  Remember that just because something it treatable is doesn't necessarily mean that the treatment is effective.
Treatment for APD can be very difficult, but it's not impossible. I've been out of school for a few years and I didn't go into a career in psychology, but of what I remember, the best way to treat someone like this is to connect a person's actions and their emotions. Emotions are the key to treating someone who has trouble connecting their emotions to their actions. A counselor or therapist would work to build a healthy, trusting relationship with the client and use that as a way to teach associating emotion with actions that involve other people. Very basically, the therapist would include statements like "how do you think that makes me feel?" when discussing the hypothetical or previous behavior of the client. It's fairly complicated, but I don't think it's fair to characterize it as impossible or nearly impossible. Successful treatment of individuals with empathy problems happens and they can result in happy, healthy, productive members of society capable of the empathy necessary to feel connected to those around them whether on an individual level or a societal level.

Regarding wikipedia, far be it from me to dismiss wikipedia outright as there's a lot of good information there, but on issues like this the limited scope of information and lack of scientific and clinical context doesn't serve the reader. If a person's inability to empathize is biological in nature, prescriptions can help and there also may be ways of bypassing the problem. While there are 'hopeless', they're decreasing in numbers as the sciences of psychology and neurology grow.
Quote from: "Wilson"Things got a little heated. Sorry if I've been rude to you.
No worries. Due to my years of experience debating creationists, I've earned +5 objectivity, +10 manna, and +50 patience. I very rarely get angry on the internet and I generally don't begrudge others allowing themselves to become passionate so long as they're respectful and don't break forum rules.
I want bad people to look forward to and celebrate the day I die, because if they don't, I'm not living up to my potential.