The Pros And Cons Of Interrogation

Talking about torture, we often refer to those criminals. Few start with mentioning about those interrogators. “We humiliated and degraded [Iraqi prisoners], and ourselves . . . [and] struggled to contain the growing sense that we had shocked our consciences and stained our souls . . . follow[ing] guidelines and obeyed the rules [of interrogation],” Eric Fair, a civilian contractor for the Department of Defense, in the New York Times, states. “But with every prisoner forced up against a wall, or made to stand naked in a cold cell, or prevented from falling asleep for significant periods of time, we felt less and less like decent men. And we felt less and less like Americans” (Fair). Interrogators are also the victims of the torture. Although
Imagine there is a trolley car out of control running extremely fast on a railroad. This car is about to crash into five people who are working on the road. You happen to stand next to a switch that can change the track of the car. If you do so, five people will certainly survive. However, one person who is working on the other side of the track will die. Will you change the track of the trolley car? Based on utilitarianism, the idea that one should take an action that produces benefits for the greatest number of people, you should change the track of the trolley car because saving five is better than saving one. Now, let’s say instead of standing next to a switch, you are standing on the bridge above the railroad. You notice that standing next to you is a fat man. If you give him a push, he will crash down the trolley car and stop the car. The five will survive, but he will die. Will you push this fat guy? According to the study, in the former case, 89 percent of research participants answered it’s morally correct to change the track of the trolley car; while in the latter case, only 11 percent of them corresponded it’s morally justified to push the fat man under the bridge (Hauser et al. 7). The consequences of both cases are identical – save the five or save the one. Then what changes the principle that saving more is better than saving less in the latter case? Here’s where the deontology – the idea that one should follow one’s own duty or obligation – comes. Based on this thought, you should not utilize other people respecting the human dignity. Consequently, back to the case of the torture, based on utilitarianism, it is morally correct to torture because it results in saving thousands of people’s lives by gaining information such as the location of the bombs; based on deontology, however, it’s morally wrong to torture because that will infringe one’s human right.
People would say torture is necessary because it is the