Abstract
M.A.
Chapter 1 looks at the continued rationalisation for the use of torture, as
supported by certain utilitarian arguments, where it is argued that torture may
be an appropriate course of action when a society is under the threat of
violent attack. The problem of defining torture is reviewed and a working
definition of torture is suggested. Five justifications for torture are discussed,
including the hard case scenario, the dilemma of dirty hands, political crime,
war and torture as an established practice.
These justifications for torture are looked at critically in Chapter 2. The
question of how victims are arbitrarily selected and the types of societies
where torture could be condoned is also outlined. It is then argued that
although interrogation is the prime reason given for the use of torture, torture
appears to be used more to quell dissent than for the purposes of gathering
information. The relationship between torture and language is also discussed,
where it is postulated that torture is a language-shattering experience. Chapter 3 looks at the phenomenology of torture. Phenomenology is defined
and a synopsis of the film, Down came a blackbird - which deals with victims
of torture in a rehabilitation centre - is proffered. Inferences are drawn from
three selected accounts of victims of torture. It is then argued that torture is an intersubjective, embodied experience and the objectification and
translation of pain into power is discussed. Further inferences are made from
this phenomenology of torture and a subjective state of mind, a sense of
injustice, is outlined because of its relevance extends beyond the victim.
In light of the dilemma of obtaining phenomenological accounts from torturers,
that in order to arrive at a tentative phenomenology of torturers, a sociological
approach is suggested as a starting point to Chapter 4. It is argued that
concepts such as obedience, socialisation and individual choice contribute to
the making of torturers. The torturer's subjective experiences, including the
torturer's sense of injustice, are outlined. This sociological approach is
broadened and it is argued that torture poisons the social system in which it
exists. The language of power is discussed and the torturer's control over
language reviewed. The concept of the magnitude gap is outlined so as to
illustrate the divide between torturer and victim, including social status and
the infliction and objectification of pain. Tentative inferences towards a
phenomenology of torturers are then suggested. In the final chapter, the hard case scenario is revisited because it is from this
justification that such concepts as "humane torture" emerge. The question of
undoing torture, that is, reversing the process once torture has occurred, is
critically discussed. To counter the continuation of hard case scenario-like
justifications, an absolutist abolitionist position is taken, wherein it is argued
that there can be no extenuating circumstances for torture given the language
and world-shattering effects torture has on those who become victims.