Can two forces be in conflict, both believing themselves to be good?

[Michael Silverbane]

So you are saying that torture is effective but you don't do it because it is evil and you put morality above practicality? And evil persons do it because they put practicality above morality? I think the question of whether evil persons torture or whether they consider it militarily ineffective is very important.

Evil folk who believe that torture is an inefficient means of information gathering probably use other means when they want to be as efficient as possible, and torture when efficiency is less important. Evil folk will use torture because it is fun.

Good folk who believe that torture is an efficient method of information gathering may use torture when they need to be efficient as possible, and refrain from using torture at other times. Good folk will refrain from using torture because it is bed.

 

[Krensky]

So you are saying that torture is effective but you don't do it because it is evil and you put morality above practicality? And evil persons do it because they put practicality above morality? I think the question of whether evil persons torture or whether they consider it militarily ineffective is very important.

"Do enough digging, and you may even be able to find the data showing a decline in the incidence of false confessions since the US made physically coercive interrogation illegal decades ago"

Perhaps we should suggest this to evil persons who do use torture because I am sure evil persons will want to have the most up-to-date interrogation methods.

Why may I ask sir or miss are you saddened? We do after all have the right to hold different opinions.

Torture is ineffective because it gets you the intelligence you want, not the truth. Anyone who says otherwise either doesn't know what they are talking about or is trying to justify their or other's evil acts.

Evil regimes like it not because it gets them answers, but because it gets them the answers they want to hear, it makes them feel tough, and most importantly enough of it will cause an innocent man to confess to any crime the torturer wants.

It is evil.

There's no moral grey area here. It's not a matter of opinion. There should be no debate. There's no justification that excuses it. There's no circumstances that makes it acceptable. It's morally repugnant.

That it's ineffective makes it doubly evil because you're committing an evil act for no utility.

I'm saddened that there's debate on this. I'm saddened the mods didn't lock it in the first place. What's next, a debate on the morality of slavery? A discussion of the 'good points' of fascism?

As a side note, you claim to believe in absolute morality, but then immediately start arguing using moral relativism and utilitarianism. Make up your mind.

 

[Sunseeker]

Evil folk who believe that torture is an inefficient means of information gathering probably use other means when they want to be as efficient as possible, and torture when efficiency is less important. Evil folk will use torture because it is fun.

Good folk who believe that torture is an efficient method of information gathering may use torture when they need to be efficient as possible, and refrain from using torture at other times. Good folk will refrain from using torture because it is bed.

This is probably the best fantasy distinction for "good and evil". Good people do bad things out of claims of necessity. See: Boromir, Arthas.

Bad people do bad things out of pure enjoyment. See: The Lich King, Dr Doom.

Of course, doing bad, to do good, will still, IMO, make most people bad people, even if they don't believe it(see: Arthas). You can only claim "I had to do it for my people!" so many times before you are doing it because you want to, not because you truly need to.

This is however, only truly applicable to a fantasy world where "good" and "bad" are more readily defined. You can't apply this sort of un-logic to reality.

 

[Alexander123]

"It's not a matter of opinion. There should be no debate."

Let's give it up for Mr. Joe Stalin.

"I'm saddened that there's debate on this. I'm saddened the mods didn't lock it in the first place."

Why? What is your opposition to debate? You seem to be opposed to freedom of speech. We are not breaking any of the forum rules. Simply having a debate. Right to free speech, and free speech as long as our opinions agree with yours is not free speech.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Perhaps we should suggest this to evil persons who do use torture because I am sure evil persons will want to have the most up-to-date interrogation methods.

As others have pointed out, those who use torture are more likely looking for confirmation of their beliefs than actual truth, and because of that, will torture until they get the answer they want to hear, even if that answer is false.

And with the inevitably brutal follow-through from such "data" any who survive to be interrogated in turn are not going to be believed until THEY likewise sing the right song...again, true or not.

Torture is how we got the Salem Witch trials; it's why Khalid Sheik Mohammed confessed to personally killing Daniel Pearl despite video evidence that this is impossible; its why the DoJ is investigating decades of cases in Chicago because of wrongful convictions obtained on the strength of testimony from the brutal interrogation techniques of one officer and his cronies- DNA exonerations were what brought this to light after someone served 16 years for a murder he didn't commit.

It's very unreliability is why testimony gained by torture or duress is inadmissible in the US and most other civilized court systems. It's also why the FBI repeatedly warned the Bush administration and CIA that torture would be ineffective in getting reliable information AND would negate any ability to achieve convictions.

Besides those sources, you'll find psychological study after psychological study showing that torture produces lies more often than truth. MRI studies showed the brains of persons undergoing "enhanced interrogation techniques" engage the parts related to creative thought more than memory- IOW, they're lying.

 

[Krensky]

"It's not a matter of opinion. There should be no debate."

Let's give it up for Mr. Joe Stalin.

"I'm saddened that there's debate on this. I'm saddened the mods didn't lock it in the first place."

Why? What is your opposition to debate? You seem to be opposed to freedom of speech. We are not breaking any of the forum rules. Simply having a debate. Right to free speech, and free speech as long as our opinions agree with yours is not free speech.

Reductio ad Stalin followed by a more general ad hominem. Why not go whole hog and Godwin the thread?

You are more then free to exercise your right to free speech and argue that torture is a good or effective thing. You'll still be wrong. As I said, torture is evil. It shouldn't be something up for debate. It's creating suffering for no reason other then to create suffering with no end utility.

Some evil acts are justifiable. Killing or maiming in legitimate self defense or of others for instance. They are still evil acts.

Torture, slavery, genocide... These are all unmitigated, unjustifiable evils. No amount of moral relativism alters that.

 

[Neonchameleon]

So you are saying that torture is effective

Who is saying torture is effective? The scenario that has been come up with by DocMoriarty relies on there being mind control magic that is (a) very powerful (zone of truth) and (b) highly limited (it can't make you talk - so you need the torture). And yes, Zone of Truth is very powerful. Without it what would happen is that the necromancer would direct his torturers in circles or into traps.

Take the magic out and torture just produces false leads because it forces people to lie. Every single experienced interrogater I have ever read has said the same - and I have pointed out why torture turns the most major incentives to lie up to 11. You have entirely ignored this.

but you don't do it because it is evil and you put morality above practicality?

People who value practicality don't torture, whatever they think of morality. Because it doesn't work. Unless you just want a confession and don't care about the truth.

And evil persons do it because they put practicality above morality?

Evil people torture because they enjoy it or are interested in confessions.

Perhaps we should suggest this to evil persons who do use torture because I am sure evil persons will want to have the most up-to-date interrogation methods.

The thing is that evil people often want the two things that torture is very good at producing. 1: Confessions. As I said, torture me enough and I will confess to being the second gunman on the grassy knoll. Which gives justification for show trials and security theatre. 2: Fear. People fear those who torture. And evil people often rule through fear.

Evil people do torture. Even smart ones. Because there are evil ends (or even just lawful neutral ones) that can be assisted by torture. The gathering of information is not one of them.

Why may I ask sir or miss are you saddened? We do after all have the right to hold different opinions.

Indeed. We all have the right to hold the opinion that the earth is flat and the moon is made of green cheese. Or that the KKK are right. Either of those opinions would sadden me because they are wrong and lead to bad things. As does the belief that torture works for the gathering of information.

 

[El Mahdi]

...People who value practicality don't torture, whatever they think of morality. Because it doesn't work. Unless you just want a confession and don't care about the truth...

Nope! Not buying it.

Are you honestly saying you believe there are absolutely no practical or rational minded people that have used or do use torture?

Do you honestly believe that every person who has, will, or is using torture is simply an irrational, sadistic, or evil person?



I know most people want to see this as a simple black & white issue. But it just isn't that simple, and wanting it to be doesn't make it so.

 

[Krensky]

Nope! Not buying it.

Are you honestly saying you believe there are absolutely no practical or rational minded people that have used or do use torture?

Do you honestly believe that every person who has, will, or is using torture is simply an irrational, sadistic, or evil person?



I know most people want to see this as a simple black & white issue. But it just isn't that simple, and wanting it to be doesn't make it so.

Practical, rational people do use torture. It's still an evil act. Considering that lots of people over the history of man have used torture and the number of actual evil people is thankfully small.

Practical, rational people do evil or ineffective things all the time. Torture's special because it's both evil and ineffective. Well, for finding information. It's very effective for obtaining confessions, certain types of brainwashing, or instilling fear.

 

[El Mahdi]

Practical, rational people do use torture. It's still an evil act.

I agree, but this isn't what you posted previously. You said: "People who value practicality don't torture, whatever they think of morality."

So what is it? Is it as many in this thread want to characterize, absolute black & white...or is it not quite that simple?

Considering that lots of people over the history of man have used torture and the number of actual evil people is thankfully small.

Reallly. And you know this how? Known a lot of torturers and truly evil people?

Practical, rational people do evil or ineffective things all the time. Torture's special because it's both evil and ineffective. Well, for finding information. It's very effective for obtaining confessions, certain types of brainwashing, or instilling fear.

And here we go with the absolutes again.

Torture is not always ineffective. Most of the time: Yes. 99.99999% of the time: Yes. As an absolute: No!

Whether Evil or not, there are circumstances, although rare, where torture is the only course of action to achieve a necessary result.

It is not absolute.

It is not black & white.


It's not that simple.