Our last meeting was both fascinating and extremely timely.
The topic was: Would you endorse the use of torture of one person if you knew it would prevent the deaths of 3000 people?
While "torture" was passionately rejected initially by some and generally rejected by everyone for a variety of sound reasons (impact on our country's sense of its principles and its ideals, adverse effect on our country's image in the eyes of other nations, slippery slope of applying torture to one group but extending its application too widely, "it doesn't work," etc.), concerns about our nation's security were soon expressed. Risk tolerance varied considerably in the group and influenced how sure we would have to be about the likelihood of 3000 deaths before the torture option might appear reasonable. Eventually, there was a tendency to view the history of man's inhumanity to man as an important object lesson. Most ultimately rejected torture as an unwise and ineffective course of action under any circumstance. (Aggressive interrogation might be acceptable but only as a last resort and after other more psychologically sophisticated and humane techniques have been tried.)
As is typical of Socrates Cafe, everyone became engaged in the topic and initial views shifted as a result of the open dialectic among the group. This is what happens when intelligent and open minded people get together to discuss serious ideas.
Hope to see you at our next meeting on November 5th at 7pm.
Richard
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
