Sullivan and Torture

I found a lot of merit in the articles for both sides of the debate today. However, the line of reasoning I found most provoking was Sullivan’s interpretation of the historic connection between torture and slavery. While both journalists agree that torture denies the humanity of the individual being tortured, Krauthammer asserts that this is a necessary evil. Sullivan, however, makes the claim that denying the humanity of a terrorist actually morally exonerates. He states that “to reduce [terrorists] to a subhuman level is to exonerate them of their acts of terrorism and mass murder—just as animals are not deemed morally responsible for killing. Insisting on the humanity of terrorists is, in fact, critical to maintaining their profound responsibility for the evil they commit.” Furthermore, if Krauthammer’s assertion that horrific deeds deduct from what makes an individual fundamentally human, he would be forced to concede that painful or degrading interrogation techniques—which he admits are morally abhorrent, although morally necessary under some circumstances—also take away the humanity of those who employ them. Is it truly morally responsible of our government to carry out policies that eradicate the humanity of its own employees?

I also thought Sullivan handled very thoughtfully and articulately the question of the effectiveness of torture. The Gutmann/Thompson article we read about torture said, in effect, that arguing for the abolition of torture on the grounds that it was ineffective was a cheap way to sidestep the actual moral question. However, because Sullivan also addressed the moral question about torture in great detail, I think the points he made about its effectiveness were valid and, in addition, very convincing. Rather than argue that torture does not produce useful information, which is difficult to support and impossible to prove, he focused on the way these interrogation techniques inhibited other techniques that, while much more morally acceptable, also have the potential of yielding more reliable information. In short, I feel that Sullivan adequately countered Krauthammer’s criticisms of a “no torture, ever” policy and challenged the conception of torture as a necessary evil. I look forward to hearing everyone else’s thoughts about these articles in class today.