Ticking time bomb scenario Wikipedia. The ticking time bomb scenario is a thought experiment that has been used in the ethics debate over whether torture can ever be justified. As a thought experiment, there is no need that the scenario be plausible it need only serve to highlight ethical considerations. Soul Drums Bernard Purdie Rar. The scenario can be formulated as follows Suppose that a person with knowledge of an imminent terrorist attack, that will kill many people, is in the hands of the authorities and that he will disclose the information needed to prevent the attack only if he is tortured. Should he be tortured1The scenario can be better understood through the arguments of those who respond to it the consequentialist argument is that nations, even those that legally disallow torture, can justify its use if they have a terrorist in custody who possesses critical knowledge, such as the location of a time bomb or a weapon of mass destruction that will soon explode and cause great loss of life. Opponents to the argument usually begin by exposing certain assumptions that tend to be hidden by initial presentations of the scenario and tend to obscure the true costs of permitting torture in real life scenariose. There is also uncertainty about the effectiveness of torture, and much opposition to torture is based on the fact it is not effective rather than any moral issue. BackgroundeditPhilosopher Jeremy Bentham has been regarded as the father of the ticking time bomb argument. He wrote in his 1. Means of extraction for extraordinary occasions Suppose an occasion to arise, in which a suspicion is entertained, as strong as that which would be received as a sufficient ground for arrest and commitment as for felony a suspicion that at this very time a considerable number of individuals are actually suffering, by illegal violence inflictions equal in intensity to those which if inflicted by the hand of justice, would universally be spoken of under the name of torture. For the purpose of rescuing from torture these hundred innocents, should any scruple be made of applying equal or superior torture, to extract the requisite information from the mouth of one criminal, who having it in his power to make known the place where at this time the enormity was practicing or about to be practiced, should refuse to do soThe concept was popularized in the 1. Les Centurions by Jean Lartguy which is set during the Algerian war. The version in the novel has the following conditions 4The evidence in support of the contention that he has the relevant information would satisfy the requirements of evidence for convicting him of an offence. There are reasonable grounds for believing that he is likely to tell the truth if severe torture is threatened, and, if necessary, applied to him. There are reasonable grounds for believing that no other means would have the effect of compelling him to tell the truth. There are grounds for believing that if the information is obtained quickly, there is a good chance of defusing the bomb before it goes off. There are reasonable grounds for believing that the likely damage to be caused by the bomb will include death of many citizens, the maiming of others, including the infliction of much more severe pain on others with much more lasting effect than will be the effect of the infliction of torture on the person who has been captured There are reasonable grounds for believing that the torturing will not have consequences which would be worse than the damage likely to result from the bomb going off. According to Darius Rejali, a professor of political science at Reed College, the possibility of sudden, massive destruction of innocent life provided French liberals with a more acceptable justification for committing torture. Views in favor of accepting torture in emergencieseditAlan Dershowitz, a prominent American defense attorney, surprised some observers by giving limited support to the idea that torture could be justified. He argued that human nature can lead to unregulated abuse off the books. How To Play Android Games On Pc Using Youwave. Therefore, it would be better if there were a regulated procedure through which an interrogator could request a torture warrant and that requiring a warrant would establish a paper trail of accountability. Torturers, and those who authorize torture, could be held to account for excesses. WfRxR1253k/0.jpg' alt='Worst-Case Scenario Tv Series' title='Worst-Case Scenario Tv Series' />In 2014, HBO announced it was adapting Asimovs Foundation series. Since then, silence. What gives A SpinOff of Cheers airing on NBC from 19932004, in which psychiatrist Dr. Frasier Crane Kelsey Grammer has moved back to his home town of Seattle. Dershowitzs suggested torture warrants, similar to search warrants and phone tap warrants, would spell out the limits on the techniques that interrogators may use, and the extent to which they may abridge a suspects rights. In September 2. 00. Alan Dershowitzs book, Why Terrorism Works Understanding the Threat, Responding to the Challenge, Richard Posner, legal scholar and judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, wrote in The New Republic, If torture is the only means of obtaining the information necessary to prevent the detonation of a nuclear bomb in Times Square, torture should be used and will be used to obtain the information. No one who doubts that this is the case should be in a position of responsibility. Views in favor of torturing the relatives of suspectseditIn February 2. Bruce Anderson wrote a column for The Independent, arguing that the British government would have not just the right, but the duty, to torture if there was a ticking bomb, and that they should torture the relatives of suspects if they believed that doing so would yield information that would avert a terrorist attack It came, in the form of a devilish intellectual challenge. Lets take your hypothesis a bit further. We have captured a terrorist, but he is a hardened character. We cannot be certain that he will crack in time. We have also captured his wife and children. After much agonising, I have come to the conclusion that there is only one answer to Sydney Kentridges question. Torture the wife and children. Views rejecting torture under all circumstanceseditSome human rights organizations, professional and academic experts, and military and intelligence leaders have absolutely rejected the idea that torture is ever legal or acceptable, even in a so called ticking bomb situation. They have expressed grave concern about the way the dramatic force and artificially simple moral answers the ticking bomb thought experiment seems to offer, have manipulated and distorted the legal and moral perceptions, reasoning and judgment of both the general population and military and law enforcement officials. They reject the proposition, implicit or explicit, that certain acts of torture are justifiable, even desirable. They believe that simplistic responses to the scenario may lead well intentioned societies down a slippery slope to legalized and systematic torture. They point out that no evidence of any real life situation meeting all the criteria to constitute a pure ticking bomb scenario has ever been presented to the public, and that such a situation is highly unlikely. As well, torture can be criticized as a poor vehicle for discovering truth, as people experiencing torture, once broken, are liable to make anything up in order to stop the pain and can become unable to tell the difference between fact and fiction under intense psychological pressure.