Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Why torture doesn’t work : two experimental proofs
person
Don't believe everything you thinkThe liminal space Veteran
In the 18th century, a Milanese judge, who did not believe that torture had any value in obtaining reliable confessions from suspected criminal, killed his mule, accused his servant of committing the misdeed, and had him subjected to torture, whereupon the man confessed to the crime; he even refused to recant on the gallows for fear of being tortured again. (He spared him of course!)
The judge then abolished the use of torture in his court. The writer Daniel Mannix recounts another demonstration:
The Duke of Brunswick in Germany was so shocked by the methods used by Inquisitors in his duchy that he asked two famous Jesuit scholars to supervise the hearings. After a careful study the Jesuits told the Duke, “The Inquisitors are doing their duty. They are arresting only people who have been implicated by the confession of other witches.”
“Come with me to the torture chamber,” suggested the Duke. The priests followed him to where a wretched woman was being stretched on the rack. “Let me question her,” suggested the Duke. “Now woman, you are a con¬fessed witch. I suspect these two men of being warlocks. What do you say? Another turn of the rack, executioners.”
“No, no!” screamed the woman. “You are quite right. I have often seen them at the Sabbat. They can turn themselves into goats, wolves, and other animals.”
“What else do you know about them?” demanded the Duke.
“Several witches have had children by them. One woman even had eight children whom these men fathered. The children had heads like toads and legs like spiders.”
http://www.matthieuricard.org/en/index.php/blog/
0
Comments
Over the years, when I've seen various movies (yes, I know, all highly fictionalized), where torture has been used, I've come to the conclusion that most times the result of the war or even the battle wouldn't have been changed much by someone telling what they knew as a result of torture.
Is it evil? Most times...yes.
I think it's always evil.
You just want to avoid the question.
—First, FBI or CIA agents apprehend a terrorist at the precise moment between timer’s first tick and bomb’s burst.
—Second, the interrogators somehow have sufficiently detailed foreknowledge of the plot to know they must interrogate this very person and do it right now.
—Third, these same officers, for some unexplained reason, are missing just a few critical details that only this captive can divulge.
—Fourth, these officers with just one shot to get the information that only this captive can divulge are best advised to try torture, as if beating him is the way to assure his wholehearted cooperation.
Another question is if officers had a tip that your family was involved and had knowledge of a known imminent attack, would you be ok in having them tortured to try to prevent that plot even though you knew they were innocent?
Very compassionate and Buddhist thinking...
I'm sorry, but I'll never get your thinking. Never.
@vinlyn - there's a difference between "on topic" and "analogy". Look it up.
Torturing this person may not yield the intended results if they are convinced of their purpose or conviction. They could relish watering our negative seeds or perhaps lie to play games... The psychological version of a suicide bomber.
They will b
I would try to appeal to the seeds of compassion that exist within them. Not emotionally but logically.
Martyrs are very dangerous to dictatorships.
Torture is always wrong in my opinion.
I've listened to both sides of the debate, and while I think that proponents of enhanced interrogation techniques make some good points, I simply can't justify treating another human being like that for any reason, particularly from a Buddhist standpoint. I don't have any good arguments to support my opinion besides the fact that I find the intentional infliction of pain and mental anguish deplorable — especially when it's done in secret, without any kind of transparency or accountability whatsoever, and has the potential to cause irreversible damage — but I think that's enough.
I know that our Founding Fathers weren't perfect, but one of the things I think people like Washington and Adams had right were their views on the treatment of prisoners, which Robert F. Kennedy Jr. details briefly in "America's anti-torture tradition," a 2005 op-ed published in the Los Angeles Times.
Just my two cents.
I am in no way pro-toture, but for me to say that under no circumstance would I ever resort to torture, even if lives were at stake, I would like to say I wouldn't so I appear more Buddhist like, but I can't.
I'm also not arguing that my view is correct, I'm just sharing where I am... some here may point out my lack of compassion and say that I do not reflect the Buddhist teachings, but hey, I'm on my path, it is what it is and where it is, and who knows where it will take me... that's the exciting part. And I respect where you all are on your paths, and am glad we have this opportunity to share.