In The Trial and Death
of Socrates, Socrates states his belief that no matter what someone else
has done to you, you do not have the right to do wrong to them. Socrates believes that an act needs to
be isolated outside of context.
Once this is done, if an act is thought to be a wrong, it is wrong in
all situations. Machiavelli relays
a different message in The Prince. Machiavelli believes that every act
should be examined in context. Certain
acts are warranted in some situations and not warranted in others. These two concepts are a general
picture of the debate over whether torture should be made legal or not. Clearly Socrates would say that torture
should not be legal and Machiavelli would allow it to always be an option. In
both political thinkers’ time, mass murder was not of the capable magnitude
that it is today. I dare to
suggest that a situation such as a “ticking bomb” in today’s world could be
posed to Socrates and it would be awfully difficult for him to say that torture
is not warranted. However, I
believe that Socrates would say something on the subject similar to what was
highlighted in the Krauthammer piece about how our actions reflect our ideals
to the rest of the world. Socrates
is not one to tolerate hypocrisy, which is evident in his idea of determining
the rightness and wrongness of an act outside of its context. An America, with all of its ideals and
luster, would be a hypocrisy if torture was made legal. In considering Machiavelli’s words, Krauthammer
wishes to protect the love that people have for “America” such as was displayed
during WWII. Machiavelli of course
does not find this to be the best option via, “it is better to be feared than
loved”. For much of my days I have
understood what Machiavelli means by this, but the subject of torture throws a
wrinkle in his statement. Perhaps
he would insist that torture falls outside of guidelines he presents for
Princes. After all he believed
that if a prince must do something bad you should do it quickly and quietly, if
you do something good, you should make it last as to savor the flavor, or
something along those lines.
America may certainly torture quietly but not swiftly. Torture is an interesting subject when
you apply the thought of late philosophers because in most of their time and
Krauthammer pointed out, torture was reserved only for slaves.
Interesting that you say Machiavelli might not agree with torture. Not sure if I agree, but that's certainly a different perspective.
ReplyDeleteI feel that Machiavelli might sometimes allow the use of torture, especially if the 'ends justify the means', but as you also state he probably would suggest that it be done "quickly and quietly". I think this goes back to Machiavelli's claim that appearances are extremely important- you can appear noble and just without actually being noble and just. However, after reading your post, I am more inclined to agree with Socrates' possible take on torture, which seems to be more of an absolutist position. With the aim of terrorists being to undermine America's reputation, now more than ever the U.S. should not resort to a terrorist method that is always wrong in an isolated context in order to fight terrorism. Too much is at stake.
ReplyDelete