The famous Swiss psychiatrist Carl Gustav Jung once said, “The healthy man does not torture others - generally it is the tortured that turn into torturers.” The very use of torture has not been justified in society because no man has the right to terrorize another man and torture him or inflict pain upon him for personal or societal benefit…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
The famous Swiss psychiatrist Carl Gustav Jung once said, “The healthy man does not torture others - generally it is the tortured that turn into torturers.” Torture is the act of inflicting pain and trauma upon someone else in order to achieve a personal gain, and subsequently, as the quote suggests, people who have faced torture in their lives, try and take out their frustration by inflicting torture upon other people. It is usually followed by way of force in order to get something from another person. Various forms of torture have made themselves infamous throughout the pages of history as such means of extracting information from people were used in the ancient times by people in power. However, in the modern day and age, there have been a number of revelations beginning and ending upon the question of whether or not torture is morally justifiable and acceptable in society, and this paper helps to provide an insight regarding the very issue.
Human beings have a right to carry out actions according to their preferences and choices and have an option of doing whatever they feel like as long as it does not interfere with the wishes of another person to a great extent. However, when a man forces someone else to do something by inflicting pain upon that person, it is not justifiable at all. This is because each man has his freedom to do whatever he may feel like and no man has the right to traumatize another by use of torture for personal benefits. It is not morally acceptable within society to have a man pulverize people around him by showing his strength and misusing the same to hurt other people.
Definition of torture offered by the United Nations Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) is, by far the most comprehensive and widely used definition. The definition also mentions several ways and reasons for which people may be tortured.
The author concludes that the public and politicians will know how illogical and immoral torture is, they will increasingly change their torture-approving mindset. Hence, the “Ancient Empiric” and “The Counter-Aesthetics of Torture” can be effective means of killing torture idealism because it weakens image interdependence and strengthens the logic and pathos against torture
ional Security Act of 1947 were precisely constituted, it would have been addressed the National Subversives Security Act since it constituted the administrative model for revolutionists to the United States. Constitution and our nation to function under the colour of law within
Correspondingly, it’s increasingly becoming a focus of the public debate. Being considered of crucial importance to both the very existence of liberal states and societies and regard for liberal values, the torture issue has divided the academia, the judiciary and the public opinion as well.
It is evident from the study that the use of torture as a tool by the investigative is effective in getting necessary information for any terrorist’s attacks or some other criminal planning that will affect the humans and property. But on the other hand, many people have debated that usage of torture as a tool can be unfair in terms of morals and ethics.
So in an urge to compete, they cheat. Many people involve in acts that are legal in their countries but they are not necessarily ethical also. Such practices include but are not limited to euthanasia, abortion, and prostitution. These people tend to follow the law of the
ete legal prohibition that is enforced by the government to voluntary and private taking away of content when a work of music appears in a particular context, which is the case in radio edits. The argument for censorship comes in; in terms of making the music playable whenever