The magnificent iconoclast Sam Harris has always had to defend himself against the lazy or fundamentalist-minded masses. It is implicit in his title. However, more rarely he has to defend himself from his peers and it’s this conflict that I find to be the juicy stuff.
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/why-id-rather-not-speak-about-torture1/
This link above an example of just such a juiciness. It’s Sam defending a statement he made about how torture, in some circumstances, is not only ethically justifiable but ethically necessary, yes necessary! He explains how it was taken out of context and provides more meat around the arguments why such an concept can be true.
I won’t say anymore about it other than to say I agree with him (only after reading it) and whet your appetite with a quote from his blog.
“My argument for the limited use of coercive interrogation (“torture” by another name) is essentially this: if you think it is ever justifiable to drop bombs in an attempt to kill a man like Osama bin Laden (and thereby risk killing and maiming innocent men, women, and children), you should think it may sometimes be justifiable to “water-board” a man like Osama bin Laden (and risk abusing someone who just happens to look like Osama bin Laden).”
No comments:
Post a Comment