It has been suggested that Western societies need to take into consideration using such extraordinary measures as torture and extraterritorial targeted killings in the fight against contemporary terrorism. The arguments of whether or not it is permissible to enable such practices, are in dispute. There is a wide variety of perspectives this issue can be considered from. For instance, situation ethics states that “the morality of an action depends on the situation”, whereas absolutism tells us that certain things like murder or telling a lie, are wrong to do whatsoever, while some scholars believe one’s standpoint may change under the pressure of circumstances such as ticking bomb scenario. In my essay I would like to present different views on the given topic.
The suggestion to use such measures as torture and targeted killings to combat terrorism is supported by Consequentialist moral reasoning which locates morality in the consequences of an act. The most influential example of Consequential Moral Reasoning is Utilitarianism, a doctrine invented by Jeremy Bentham, the 18th century English political philosopher. The right thing to do individually or collectively, according to Utilitarianism, is to act in a way that maximises the overall level of happiness, or utility, which is the balance of happiness over suffering, pleasure over pain. Jeremy Bentham’s view is often summed up as a slogan “The greatest good for the greatest number”. If torturing or killing a terrorist helped save a group of people, not mentioning hundreds or thousands of people, …show more content…
Some of them suggest harsh and efficient measures need to be taken, while the others emphasise the importance of abiding by the fundamental law and principles of morality. But all opinions are in favour that contemporary terrorism is one of the gravest threat the humanity has ever been confronted
The suggestion to use such measures as torture and targeted killings to combat terrorism is supported by Consequentialist moral reasoning which locates morality in the consequences of an act. The most influential example of Consequential Moral Reasoning is Utilitarianism, a doctrine invented by Jeremy Bentham, the 18th century English political philosopher. The right thing to do individually or collectively, according to Utilitarianism, is to act in a way that maximises the overall level of happiness, or utility, which is the balance of happiness over suffering, pleasure over pain. Jeremy Bentham’s view is often summed up as a slogan “The greatest good for the greatest number”. If torturing or killing a terrorist helped save a group of people, not mentioning hundreds or thousands of people, …show more content…
Some of them suggest harsh and efficient measures need to be taken, while the others emphasise the importance of abiding by the fundamental law and principles of morality. But all opinions are in favour that contemporary terrorism is one of the gravest threat the humanity has ever been confronted