Torture? No, how can we be sure that torture will do any good? That we even have the right one in front of us who can tell us what we need to know to save those 10,000? As for the inoculation, I did say "The troubles around abuse is to define when something turns into abuse." This might be one of those cases.
Sapphi ... I don't have answers, just questions ... But I don't think life can be categorised ... As soon as you do the exception pops up ... And to save 10000 yes I think I could inflict pain ... Sorry, but it's for the greater good
You don't have to be sorry. I don't want to turn things black and white. There will be universal stuff that are in my perspective, and they will vary from others, and that is exactly where the greyish nuances get into play. :-)
I actually don't approve of innoculation so personally i'd feel its an assault but in general terms no it wouldnt be abuse at all.. pain isn't necessarily abuse if its in theory for the child's best interests of believed to be so.. but that's truly nothing like *abuse* we were talking about.. as in child molestation.. sorry but there's never a right there... never.. not even if the child wants it... or believes they do... smacking as in a form of child rearing isn't abuse per se but systematic use of it it is.. there are fairly black and white definitions of abuse... I can't see an exception where sexually molesting a child is ok...
In my description of abuse it concerned always abuse against one who was powerless or much less able to defend themselves.. for me that's key...children, animals, vulnerable women and as i say the abuse would be systematic/repeated and wouldn't cover one off things like smacking a child for naughtiness, (tho i still believe that's wrong) or an innoculation, (ditto and it's believed to be forbest interests)
Re the bomb... you know.. i wouldnt torture... i just wouldnt as i believe there are other ways to get that info out of someone ... but if i absolutely had to.. and there was no other way... and it wasnt a child - yea I probably would..
I think it's easy for us to say we wouldn't torture in that scenario, but I don't think any of us can answer that with any certainty. I personally think any one of us talking here would be more likely to torture someone if we were in said situation and thought the situation so grave. Not because any of us are without empathy or it isn't against our moral beliefs. Just the fact that none of us would be conditioned to handle the situation and would be brought to our wits ends and because of that be prone to rash and illogical decisions.
I mean seriously can anyone of us say the possibility of torturing someone when a large group of peoples lives are at stake in a moments time is out of the question? Does any of us really have any idea what we are capable of when faced with such a situation? I can personally account to much, much lesser situations where I reached my limits and lost my chit causing me to engage in actions that I find reprehensible in retrospect and would never condone morally.
Agreed and note I did say i would under certain circumstances... for me it would be a last resort... and I would def try everything else first.. I don't believe it would cause me any distress if i had to...perhaps because I would know i had tried everything else and/or had no other choice.. that doesn't fundamentally change that I believe it's wrong
Benedict Arnold 