A random innocent American citizen is being murdered every minute. The only way to stop this is to get a piece of information, which once obtained, stops the murders instantly and completely (without further consequence). Assume we can know the random murders are stopped, therefore the information can be reliably verified.
The only person who has this information has been captured and is in the hands of the best interrogator in the world (think “Jack Bauer”). The evil person has no allegiances nor family, and is trained to resist all forms of torture. Consider this person the world’s best at resisting interrogation and there is no other source of the information.
It is 100% known that this person has the information, but will make every attempt to avoid revealing it for as long as possible.
For this thought experiment, I pose the following questions:
Should the evil person be tortured and if so, how?
Will it work and if so, how quickly?
Can the info be extracted without causing permanent damage to the evil person?
Well, torture being illegal, Jack Bauer would probably waterboard the guy and hope to God that he’d get a Presidental pardon for doing it. Seriously, our system is already cut out to handle “24” and keep torture illegal.
Well, I could contrive a scenario, but it wouldn’t really pertain to the thought experiment and you probably wouldn’t be satisfied. For example, a jigsaw killer copy-cat has imprisoned a large number of people in a diabolical automated death factory. Each time someone dies, a picture of the deceased is sent to the authorities. The evil person knows the location, but doesn’t want the kills to end until his mad scheme has played out.
I dare you to state whether this scenario is satisfying.
Can there be a scenario more at odds with reality?
If an American is being murdered every minute, it is clear this guy isn’t actually carrying out the murders. If he has knowledge of the plot, then clearly there are many people who also have knowledge of the plot. And if we know for certain that the subject has knowledge of the plot, then the good guys must have more knowledge of the conspiracy than simply that this guy knows about the plot, otherwise how would we be certain that this guy is in on it? That means that there has to be other investigative avenues still open and the assertion that the only method to get more information is by torture must be false.
Since we’re already so far estranged from a realistic scenario, I propose that the subject be placed in… a comfy chair. He’ll sing like a canary.
If it is The Controvert’s intention to argue that if torture is acceptable in his highly contrived scenario, then it is acceptable full stop, then he is welcome to do so, but it would be good if he made a minimal effort to come up with a scenario that has some glancing relation to reality.
For example:
A random resident of an American city (let’s say, the Washington DC area) is being murdered once every few days. The only way to stop this is to get a confession of guilt from the actual person masterminding the murders, which once obtained, stops the murders instantly and completely (without further consequence). Assume we can know the random murders are stopped if the confession is given by the actual mastermind.
Twenty white males who are of a certain age, height and build, and who, according to witnesses, may have been driving a white van seen at the time of the murders, have been arrested and are in the hands of the best interrogator in the world (think “Jack Bauer”). Some of the arrested men (possibly including the evildoer) have military backgrounds and have been trained to resist torture. Others have multiple arrest records and highly questionable histories.
It is 100% believed that one of the twenty men is the mastermind behind the murders, but will make every attempt to avoid making a confession for as long as possible.
Should the twenty men be tortured and if so, how?
Will it work and if so, how quickly?
Can a valid confession be obtained without causing permanent damage to the 19 innocent men?
The torture proceeds and the authorities obtain confessions from nearly all the suspects. Halfway through the torturing of the twentieth person, another murder occurs and witnesses state the suspect appeared to be an African American male driving an older model sedan. What should the authorities do next?
Did you mean to post this thread in Cafe Society, along with other threads about highly improbable and poorly written B-movie scripts, high-concept television series and men’s adventure novels?
Sorry if this is the wrong forum, but I was also trying to ascertain if the best could resist torture indefinitely. Sort of an unstoppable force meets immovable wall question.
It’s as satisfying as any number of implausible thrillers I’ve enjoyed.
Look you can dream up a scenario to justify anything. Say I say “Ok, OK, we gotta torture this guy, God forgive us!” Then we do and he breaks and he gives us the location. But when we get to the location the key has been swallowed by a baby! What do you do now, Mr. “Disembowling babies is always wrong?” What do you do? (Stolen from Tom the Dancing Bug.)
