Citation

Wolfendale J. Soc. Theory Pract. 2006; 32(2): 269-287.

Affiliation

Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne (jwo@unimelb.edu.au)

Copyright

(Copyright © 2006, Florida State University Center for Social Philosophy)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This essay critiques the "ticking bomb" argument in favor of torture on the grounds that sanctioning torture of necessity sanctions the (state) training of torturers. The ticking bomb argument suggests that the torture of a single person is a permissible evil if it would save the population of a city. The author argues that for the ticking bomb argument to work, there would have to be in place a premeditated, state sponsored program for the training of torturers. This puts the state in the position of creating "crimes of obedience," which are by definition state sponsored acts of violence. There is no way to ensure that torturers only use their skills in certain morally justifiable cases and under just orders from authority.

Language: en