Morality of Water Torture

The present question regarding the nature and morality of torture offers us an excellent opportunity to advance the level of sophistication of our understanding of morality. We learn best when we are questioning a matter that is meaningful to us.

I was eleven years old when Germany and Japan surrendered and WWII was finally over. One searing memory of this war were the stories I read and the movies I watched during and after the war regarding the torture and general brutality that the German Gestapo inflicted upon the people they conquered. I do not know why this left such a strong impression on me but it certainly did.

Coincidentally I have been studying “Moral Imagination� by Mark Johnson. This is the same Johnson who coauthored the book “Philosophy in the Flesh� with George Lakoff. I have decided to apply the theories Johnson presents in his book as a means to illuminate this matter regarding the morality of water torture used by my country in our struggle with Islamic extremists.

Moral understanding is like any other kind of experience; when we examine a domain of experience that relates to human relationships we must focus our attention on human understanding it self. If we do so we discover that human understanding is fundamentally imaginative in character.

“Many of our most basic concepts have considerable internal structure that cannot be accounted for by the classical theory of concepts as defined by necessary and sufficient features…The primary forms of moral imagination are concepts with prototype structure, semantic frames, conceptual metaphors, and narratives.�

To become morally insightful we must become knowledgeable of these imaginative structures. First, we must give up our illusions about absolute moral codes and also our radical moral subjectivism. Second we must refine our “perception of character traits and situations and of developing empathetic imagination to take up the part of others.�

Empathy is a character trait that can be cultivated by habit and will. Sympathy is somewhat of an automatic response.

When we see a mother weeping over the death of her child caused by a suicide bomber we feel immediate sympathy. Often we will come to tears. But we do not feel anything like that for the mother who may be weeping over the death of her child who was the bomber.

To understand the bomber we must use empathy. We attempt through imagination and reason to create a situation that will allow us to understand why this was done. This is a rational means to understand someone who acts different than we would.

“Empathy is the idea that the vital properties which we experience in or attribute to any person or object outside ourselves are the projections of our own feelings and thoughts.�

The subject viewing an object of art experiences emotional attitudes leading to feelings that are attributes of qualities in the art object thus aesthetic pleasure may be considered as “objectified self-enjoyment in which the subject and object are fused.�

The social sciences adopt a similar concept called ‘empathic understanding’, which refers to the deliberate attempt to identify with another person and accounting for that persons actions by “our own immediate experience of our motivations and attitudes in similar circumstances as we remember or imagine them�. This idea refers to a personal resonance between two people.

“What is crucial is that our moral reasoning can be constrained by the metaphoric and other imaginative structures shared within our culture and moral tradition, yet it can also be creative in transforming our moral understanding, our identity, and the course of our lives. Without this kind of imaginative reasoning we would lead dreadfully impoverished lives. We would be reduced to repeating habitual actions, driven by forces and contingencies beyond our control.�

Can you imagine an individual who is a hard headed realist and very accomplished at empathy sanctioning the use of water torture on anyone, friend or enemy?

The news media invariably describe water torture as imparting a "sensation of drowning" or as "simulated drowning." As practiced now, in the second world war, and in the middle ages, water torture (AKA "water boarding") is actually drawn out drowning. Rather than immersing a victim in water, the clever devisers of this torture found that pouring water in the face of the bound captive was more effective in that it did not cut off audio communication with the victim. The drowning process is thus extended in time while allowing the victim to be interrogated while he or she is broken.

With water torture, either the victim breaks, the torturer gives up, or the victim drowns to death.

It appears to me that few people have ever been taught anything about empathy. Empathy is an effort of the imagination to walk in the shoes of another. I suspect that anyone who understand the meaning of empathy and has been able to walk in the shoes of another could not torture that individual.

Take anyone who you know well and truly despise and imagine torturing that individual. I do not think any normal person could do such a thing.

I think that one of the reasons that we humans are on the path to self destruction is partially due to the fact that our culture has never embraced the understanding of empathy.

I think that empathy is one of those things that can't be taught. You either have it or you don't. Those who have no empathy we usually label sociopathic or psychopathic.

There are certain kinds of people who are very useful in times of war, but who become ostracized in times of peace. Certain war heroes come to mind. The torturers are not celebrated as heroes, but they find employment, don't they?

Rick

Why cannot empathy be taught? It is a very simple concept.

Ever tried teaching it to one who doesn't have it?

Logic dictates selfishness. Empathy goes against reason.

Actually, I have heard of some psychopaths who understand empathy completely. They use this knowledge very efficiently to their own advantage. Do you know anthing about con artists?

Empathy is very rational. I did see the movie "The Flim-Flam Man".

It's true, empathy makes a lot of sense to those who have it. Those who don't have it might be glad to be unencumbered, but can they ever be truly happy?

A thief once entered the house of a great sage, and as he was searching through the dark house for valuables he wandered into the bedroom where the sage was sitting in his bed. The Sage said to the thief, the money is in a box on the table, would you kindly leave me enough to pay my rent.
The thief took the money and left the house but was later caught by the authorities after breaking into several more houses.
After spending some time in prison for the burglaries the thief returned to the Sage to become his student to understand why he did what he did.

Great deeds of compassion are often overlooked. The Sage saw that if the thief was given a chance to complete what he needed to do to become something different he could help him find his way.


Only someone who has arrived at the destination may help another see the way, but no one can make choices for another.