I don't find anybody who supports torturing other human beings to be rational and objective. But I'm the moral type.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
French Tunisian and Kuwait Terrorist attacks {merged}
- Thread starter Gelsons Dad
- Start date
I don't find anybody who supports torturing other human beings to be rational and objective. But I'm the moral type.
KenTheLandlord
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2009
- Messages
- 4,256
Ask Harris as to why "Given what many of us believe about the exigencies of our war on terrorism, the practice of torture, in certain circumstances, would not seem to be only permissible but necessary" p. 199.
Really? Given on p.92 "The church did not officially condemn the use of torture until the bull of Pope Pius VII in 1816."
It's 2015 and he is happy to endorse it. Puts him 200 years behind the church.
Really? Given on p.92 "The church did not officially condemn the use of torture until the bull of Pope Pius VII in 1816."
It's 2015 and he is happy to endorse it. Puts him 200 years behind the church.
BlueTangerine
Well-Known Member
I don't find anybody who supports torturing other human beings to be rational and objective. But I'm the moral type.
You'll have to provide the quote.. I didn't say I hung on his every word.. There are always scenarios in which torture should be permitted.
BlueTangerine
Well-Known Member
Ask Harris as to why "Given what many of us believe about the exigencies of our war on terrorism, the practice of torture, in certain circumstances, would not seem to be only permissible but necessary" p. 199.
Really? Given on p.92 "The church did not officially condemn the use of torture until the bull of Pope Pius VII in 1816."
It's 2015 and he is happy to endorse it. Puts him 200 years behind the church.
I don't want to get into a 'defend Sam Harris' argument, but did he stipulate as to when torture could be necessary?
There are always scenarios in which torture should be permitted.
As far as I'm concerned we have nothing else to discuss.
BlueTangerine
Well-Known Member
As far as I'm concerned we have nothing else to discuss.
Not even the ticking time bomb? I would say you are immoral if you believe that,
MadchesterCity
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 18,265
If only we could elect Sam Harris as President of US. Out with religion, in with Science!
KenTheLandlord
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2009
- Messages
- 4,256
I don't want to get into a 'defend Sam Harris' argument, but did he stipulate as to when torture could be necessary?
After 20 pages of crucifying the church over the Spanish Inquisition he did pop up and thought is was fine with Al Qaeda members even if it was 1 chance in a million something relevant should be unearthed. He gave no views about whether the person was actually in Al Qaeda.
BlueTangerine
Well-Known Member
After 20 pages of crucifying the church over the Spanish Inquisition he did pop up and thought is was fine with Al Qaeda members even if it was 1 chance in a million something relevant should be unearthed. He gave no views about whether the person was actually in Al Qaeda.
I haven't read that book.. I'll just say there has to be enough evidence.. as I just said - I see torture (if it has any chance of hailing correct information) could be permitted to a person known to have the info of a bomb that will kill people.
If you witnessed a man machine gunning innocents on a beach and you caught hold of him, and he said 'there is bomb that is going to go off, at such a time, it will kill more..' After trying your best with words and psychology, do you not spend the last 10 minutes trying to get the information out through pain?
Blue Haze
Well-Known Member
Agreed. He used the illogical "ticking bomb" scenario to justify the government's use of torture. He's a faux intellectual.Sam Harris is an absolute clown. Read his book "The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason".
The fuckwittery of the man is a sight to behold.