A new blog series. The purpose of this series – contrary to many other series of posts on this blog – is not to inform, to entertain, or to argue for our points of view. What we want to do here is learn what you think. Of course, we have the comment sections for that, but here we want to try to guide your opinions in a more structured way. We will present you with certain moral dilemmas, some of which are well-known in philosophy; others not. Then we ask you to answer a few questions (and you can see how other people have answered). In case the straitjacket of the provided possible answers doesn’t suit you, you can of course go to the comment section and elaborate.
First dilemma: Suppose you spot a suicide bomber walking towards a crowd. There’s no doubt about his intentions. You are the only one who has correctly identified the bomber, and you have no other option but to use deadly force to stop him. You can’t warn the crowd, nor can you ask security forces to intervene. Moreover, the only possible way for you to stop him is by using a flamethrower.
More on targeted killing of terrorists. More on the war on terror. More on suicide bombers. More on the ticking bomb argument for torture.
The question is still a little vague for me. Is my life in danger? I think I definitely have the right to use deadly force to protect myself. If the only option is a flamethrower, which seems quite absurd, so be it. The answers you provide are also slightly confusing. Is the second and fourth options you provide alluding to the fact that the use of a flamethrower constitutes “torture”?
The reference to the ticking bomb torture is there because it would seem (I stress “seem”) that if it’s acceptable to stop a suicide bomber with a flamethrower, it would be – a fortiori – acceptable to use torture to stop a ticking bomb terrorist.
Also, regarding self-defense, let’s assume that you are yourself not in any danger. Makes the case more interesting I think.
It seems unlikely to me. First of all, the flamethrower being “the only possible way to stop him” is pretty unlikely (and wouldn’t that risk the possibility of setting off the explosives anyway?). But even when we accept that a flamethrower is the only possible way to stop a person in this case, it does not follow that torture is okay in the “ticking bomb case,” because torture is not the only option available and, moreover, produces unreliable results. Furthermore, the “ticking bomb” cases present scenarios where the tortures are not in danger themselves and the captive does not pose an imminent threat to others (he’s supposedly disarmed and detained by authorities).
As for this case, if I was in possession of a flamethrower and was not in danger, I don’t think I would kill the person. So, I vote the fourth option.
Ok. I added the flamethrower not to make the situation absurd or improbable, but because I think in the minds of those who defend ticking bomb torture, using the flamethrower is more cruel than torture, and hence torture is justified if stopping the suicide bomber with a flamethrower is justified. For the record: that’s not my view. My view is here: http://filipspagnoli.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/the-little-door-to-hell-torture-and-the-ticking-bomb-argument/
Yeah, the flamethrower may constitute torture IF it was not the only option available to defend oneself. Again, that’s unlikely to be case (ever) so the use of a flamethrower is very likely always torturous. Clearly, there are other options in warfare or in interrogation, so the use of a flamethrower is wrong and constitutes torture. Not only that, but in ticking bomb scenarios, the capture person does not pose an imminent threat to anyone, as opposed to the terrorist in your case. In this case you provide, it’s literally the only option (for whatever reason). However, since the person with the flamethrower is not in danger, I do not think the use of it is justified.
Pingback: Moral Dilemmas (10): The Morality of Targeted Killing of Terrorists « P.A.P. Blog – Human Rights Etc.
Pingback: Terrorism and Human Rights (39): Targeted Killing and Democratic Peace | P.a.p.-Blog | Human Rights Etc.