Social Influences in Consumer Behavior
- Submitted by: Sparco28
- Views: 885
- Category: Other
- Date Submitted: 11/11/2010 08:30 PM
- Pages: 4
- Report this Essay
Torture Articles Analysis
It has been roughly eight years since the terrors attacks of 9-11 tragically occurred and a war against terror was launched. This war against terror has been recently brought to light through the media, the topic of torture. Two articles that argue the topic of torture include the article, “Is Torture Ever Justified?” by Professor Michael Levin and an editorial article found in The Economist. These two articles help bring the idea of torture into perspective on different levels and viewpoints.
In Michael Levin’s article on torture pre September 11th, Levin takes a strong stance quickly on the issue stating that in specific situations it is “morally mandatory” to engage in torture. Levin follows his initial strong stance with a barrage of scenarios in which torture might be the deciding factor in saving the day. He tries to sway the reader to his logic by trying to appeal to their pathos and through guilt. For example; “If you caught the terrorist, could you sleep nights knowing that millions died because you couldn’t bring yourself to apply the electrodes?” He uses guilt and follows his intense scenarios of terrorism with a sense of justification for committing torture to another human being. Levin justifies torture of a terrorist acceptable when the lives of innocent’s people are at stake and when it could be the deciding factor if they lived or died. In order to protect his ethos, Levin uses his reasoning that he is not an “advocate of torture as punishment, rather as an acceptable measure for preventing future evils.” This was an excellent part of his article because it ascertains to the reader that he is not barbaric, but rather believes in protecting innocent lives even if it means the extreme case of torture which only strengthens his argument. Although, his argument is flawed when he assumes that torture always gets the answers needed in a timely manor in order to save the day, but in reality when a human being is...
It has been roughly eight years since the terrors attacks of 9-11 tragically occurred and a war against terror was launched. This war against terror has been recently brought to light through the media, the topic of torture. Two articles that argue the topic of torture include the article, “Is Torture Ever Justified?” by Professor Michael Levin and an editorial article found in The Economist. These two articles help bring the idea of torture into perspective on different levels and viewpoints.
In Michael Levin’s article on torture pre September 11th, Levin takes a strong stance quickly on the issue stating that in specific situations it is “morally mandatory” to engage in torture. Levin follows his initial strong stance with a barrage of scenarios in which torture might be the deciding factor in saving the day. He tries to sway the reader to his logic by trying to appeal to their pathos and through guilt. For example; “If you caught the terrorist, could you sleep nights knowing that millions died because you couldn’t bring yourself to apply the electrodes?” He uses guilt and follows his intense scenarios of terrorism with a sense of justification for committing torture to another human being. Levin justifies torture of a terrorist acceptable when the lives of innocent’s people are at stake and when it could be the deciding factor if they lived or died. In order to protect his ethos, Levin uses his reasoning that he is not an “advocate of torture as punishment, rather as an acceptable measure for preventing future evils.” This was an excellent part of his article because it ascertains to the reader that he is not barbaric, but rather believes in protecting innocent lives even if it means the extreme case of torture which only strengthens his argument. Although, his argument is flawed when he assumes that torture always gets the answers needed in a timely manor in order to save the day, but in reality when a human being is...