Paper on Torture

Within the last few decades, torture has become a hotly debated topic around the world. Since there is no universal moral code of torture, every nation is left to create their own set of moral rules and standards to deal with torture, but in the end torture is carried out to accomplish one goal. This goal, which is to find out information from suspected persons of interest by any means possible, has become a fascination of many governments and has engulfed our population as a whole. With the emergence of hit television shows like 24, it is clear that as a population we want to see our enemies being tortured, but in what manner and to what extent that torture should be carried out in is debatable. While arguments rage around the globe today about what is good torture and what is bad torture, this subject was touched upon long before the recent intrigue by philosopher Henry Shue in his article "Torture". In his paper, Shue considers the argument that torture must be morally permissible in some cases, because just-combat killing the enemy in war is morally permissible, and torture is not as bad as killing. Shue argues that point by saying that torture may well be worse than killing if the person being tortured does not have a way to defend himself like someone in war can. Shue calls the importance of a person having some way to defend himself the "constraint of possible compliance." This "constraint of possible compliance" is a major part of Shue's argument for why he thinks that at times, interrogational torture may be justified, but illegal.

The "constraint of possible compliance" is used by Shue as a way to determine if torture is or is not justified when compared to killing someone in war. According to Shue, in order for torture to meet the "constraint of possible compliance", the victim must have available to him an act of compliance which, if he decides to use, would end the torture. This means that the purpose of the torture must be known to the victim, and if the victim gives up what the torturer is looking for the torture must come to an end. Shue's logic behind the "constraint of possible compliance" is that since the soldier who dies in combat is usually not defenseless, the torture victim should have a way to defend himself when he is being tortured.

If the torture victim does not have any means of defense, Shue believes that torture is even worse than killing someone in war. While this is a sound argument, it is very difficult to establish if a victim of torture does indeed have any sort of defense. The problem is that when a torturer is torturing someone, the torturer has no idea who he is dealing with and how defenseless that person might actually be. If there is something the torture victim could do to stop the torture, say by giving