"Torture Doesn't Work"

[Infected Mushroom]

There are many arguments against torture and some of them even make a bit of sense. However, one thing I never understood was the assertion:

"Torture doesn't work."

I don't understand how anyone can say it doesn't work/can't produce results. I have heard many liberal-minded people claim this while I was at university... where they would say something along the lines of "why would any government ever use torture? those tortured would just keep making things up to annoy the authorities/frustrate them. Torture could never work." I have always felt that this was a somewhat delusional position and that people would eat their own words under unfortunate situations.

Its one thing to say that torture is a "human rights abuse" or that its not necessarily always the best go-to method for extracting information... but to say it doesn't work? Seems a bit strong.

Fact of the matter is, threats do produce results. When threats are backed up by the definite use of force and pain inducement... I can't see how someone can hold out. Now of course... if you have NOTHING to tell the government because you in fact know nothing, you're kind of in a doomed position. But if you do have something... I don't see how it won't be extracted (just a question of time frame). A person without any kind of anti-torture training would probably yield in minutes...

Not sure what your thoughts on this subject are.

Now let's discuss a little thought experiment:

You are a criminal and you have some information the government wants from you. You don't want to give it to them. After some back-and-forth, the government decides to resort to torture. They say to you:

"Since you refuse to tell us what we need to know... we will keep hurting you until you do tell us."

They start to torture you and it goes on and on and it doesn't stop until you give them what they want (if you pass out from the pain, you get reset and it continues). Assume that they use a method that is in the style of Ramsay Bolton.

The questions I'd like you to ponder, think about, and then explain are as follows:

1. How long would you be able to hold out? A few minutes? 1 hour? Days? Months? Years? Try to estimate.
2. How do you reconcile the phrase "torture doesn't work" with the fact that 99-100 percent of people in the above situation (including yourself probably) would in a pretty short amount of time, tell the government what they need to know to avoid the torture?
3. What do you think in general about the phrase, "Torture Doesn't Work"... is there a way to re-phrase/clarify it so that its a more defensible position?

1. I'll give myself 10 minutes. And I feel that this is being EXTREMELY generous.

2. There is no need to reconcile it because it can't be reconciled. Its a misleading slogan. Torture does work. Anyone who actually has the information is going to give it up. Its just a problematic method in the sense that if the person was wrongly suspected and in fact knows nothing... they will be tortured ad infinitum. But you can be sure that if anyone knows anything, they will divulge. This is why its historically been used throughout history by the police and military forces.

3.

It doesn't work in getting legal convictions. It doesn't work if there isn't any actual information from the person tortured (they can't gain clairvoyance while being tortured if they are innocent). It doesn't work if you want to stay true to human rights.

However, if someone has got something... they are going to tell you pretty soon if you use a sufficiently painful method. Its just a matter of how far you want to go.

In general I understand other objections to torture but a blanket "torture doesn't work" statement just doesn't hold up.

[Vassenor]

Just because torture works on Game of Thrones does not mean it works in real life.

The CIA admits it doesn't work, and they were one of the biggest proponents of it in the early 2000s.

[Azadistan-land of the free]

There are many arguments against torture and some of them even make a bit of sense. However, one thing I never understood was the assertion:

"Torture doesn't work."

I don't understand how anyone can they it doesn't work/can't produce results. I have heard many liberal-minded people claim this while I was at university... where they would say something along the lines of "why would any government ever use torture? those tortured would just keep making things up to annoy the authorities/frustrate them. Torture could never work." I have always felt that this was a somewhat delusional position and that people would eat their own words under unfortunate situations.

Its one thing to say that torture is a "human rights abuse" or that its not necessarily always the best go-to method for extracting information... but to say it doesn't work? Seems a bit strong.

Fact of the matter is, threats do produce results. When threats are backed up by the definite use of force and pain inducement... I can't see how someone can hold out. Now of course... if you have NOTHING to tell the government because you in fact know nothing, you're kind of in a doomed position. But if you do have something... I don't see how it won't be extracted (just a question of time frame). A person without any kind of anti-torture training would probably yield in minutes...

Not sure what your thoughts on this subject are.

Now let's discuss a little thought experiment:

You are a criminal and you have some information the government wants from you. You don't want to give it to them. After some back-and-forth, the government decides to resort to torture. They say to you:

"Since you refuse to tell us what we need to know... we will keep hurting you until you do tell us."

They start to torture you and it goes on and on and it doesn't stop until you give them what they want (if you pass out from the pain, you get reset and it continues). Assume that they use a method that is in the style of Ramsay Bolton.

The questions I'd like you to ponder, think about, and then explain are as follows:

1. How long would you be able to hold out? A few minutes? 1 hour? Days? Months? Years? Try to estimate.
2. How do you reconcile the phrase "torture doesn't work" with the fact that 99-100 percent of people in the above situation (including yourself probably) would in a pretty short amount of time, tell the government what they need to know to avoid the torture?
3. What do you think in general about the phrase, "Torture Doesn't Work"... is there a way to re-phrase/clarify it so that its a more defensible position?

1. I'll give myself 10 minutes. And I feel that this is being EXTREMELY generous.

2. There is no need to reconcile it because it can't be reconciled. Its a misleading slogan. Torture does work. Anyone who actually has the information is going to give it up. Its just a problematic method in the sense that if the person was wrongly suspected and in fact knows nothing... they will be tortured ad infinitum. But you can be sure that if anyone knows anything, they will divulge. This is why its historically been used throughout history by the police and military forces.

3.

It doesn't work in getting legal convictions. It doesn't work if there isn't any actual information from the person tortured (they can't gain clairvoyance while being tortured if they are innocent). It doesn't work if you want to stay true to human rights.

However, if someone has got something... they are going to tell you pretty soon if you use a sufficiently painful method. Its just a matter of how far you want to go.

In general I understand other objections to torture but a blanket "torture doesn't work" statement just doesn't hold up.

Ok i think it generally doesnt work because people are not able to think clearly, They will say information but a large ammount of that will not be the information requested, especially in complex crimes.

[Grenartia]

The reason it doesn't work is because the tortured person will say literally anything, even outright lies, to get the torture to stop. [/thread

[Vassenor]

The reason it doesn't work is because the tortured person will say literally anything, even outright lies, to get the torture to stop. [/thread

This, pretty much. When a person breaks, they are not guaranteed to be telling the truth as much as saying what they think you want to hear.

[Infected Mushroom]

Just because torture works on Game of Thrones does not mean it works in real life.

The CIA admits it doesn't work, and they were one of the biggest proponents of it in the early 2000s.

So are you saying that if you were in the situation described in the OP that you would be able to take infinite torture without ever yielding the information?

it just sounds a bit unbelievable

[Grenartia]

The reason it doesn't work is because the tortured person will say literally anything, even outright lies, to get the torture to stop. [/thread

This, pretty much. When a person breaks, they are not guaranteed to be telling the truth as much as saying what they think you want to hear.

Especially if the truth is undesireable or unbelievable to hear.

[Infected Mushroom]

The reason it doesn't work is because the tortured person will say literally anything, even outright lies, to get the torture to stop. [/thread

This, pretty much. When a person breaks, they are not guaranteed to be telling the truth as much as saying what they think you want to hear.

they aren't guaranteed to be telling the truth the first time but they will be eventually right?

unless you're saying they can be tortured indefinitely without ever yielding (which again, just seems a bit unrealistic)

[United Imperial Systems]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanns_Scharff

More humane methods of interrogations exists, while torture works, it's just unethical to use when other, less painful ways exist.

[Earthbound Immortal Squad]

I agree blunt torture doesn't work but torture will eventually evolve as everything does and I think when that happens I will work again.

[Infected Mushroom]

This, pretty much. When a person breaks, they are not guaranteed to be telling the truth as much as saying what they think you want to hear.

Especially if the truth is undesireable or unbelievable to hear.

what is the largest concentration of physical pain that you have endured in your life?

Now imagine that it is being purposefully applied against you until/unless you tell them the information they want. Do you honestly believe that you, under such a situation (or anyone else), could realistically refuse to give the information and keep making things up?

Are all criminals suddenly heroes now?

[Petrasylvania]

So Shroom trying to advocate torture. Well, that's something new.

[Grenartia]

This, pretty much. When a person breaks, they are not guaranteed to be telling the truth as much as saying what they think you want to hear.

they aren't guaranteed to be telling the truth the first time but they will be eventually right?

unless you're saying they can be tortured indefinitely without ever yielding (which again, just seems a bit unrealistic)

How can you know the information they're giving you is false without already knowing the information you're torturing them for?

[The South Falls]

The reason why we stopped police coercion is because people would throw out lies and make false confessions. Torture is the same.

[Infected Mushroom]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanns_Scharff

More humane methods of interrogations exists, while torture works, it's just unethical to use when other, less painful ways exist.

I agree that other methods exist. And I would even agree that they can be situationally more effective.

However, it is a no-brainer to me that when people are tortured... in the event that they do have the information that is actually being sought... they will pretty quickly give the information. If you have anti-torture training (ex special forces) you might be able to hold out for quite a bit longer but again, we are all only human.

[The Frozen Forest]

Especially if the truth is undesireable or unbelievable to hear.

what is the largest concentration of physical pain that you have endured in your life?

Now imagine that it is being purposefully applied against you until/unless you tell them the information they want. Do you honestly believe that you, under such a situation (or anyone else), could realistically refuse to give the information and keep making things up?

Are all criminals suddenly heroes now?

Not to get too involved, but they say that everyone is the hero of their own story. I don't see why that wouldn't apply to criminals too. They may understand they aren't changing the world but they may still see themselves as defending their own beliefs...or something.

[Philjia]

Torture only reliably works on people who aren't willing to die for the cause, and people who aren't willing to die for the cause don't need to be tortured. You also have to know what intelligence the subject has, and if you're already that far you probably don't need to torture a guy to get over the finishing line.

[Infected Mushroom]

The reason why we stopped police coercion is because people would throw out lies and make false confessions. Torture is the same.

Confessions are one thing. A person will "confess" when tortured and the confession isn't worth much since we can't know if its a real confession or just one procured to avoid pain.

However, what about with respect to actual information (ex where I've hidden the bombs or where the next drug trade will happen etc?). I believe that for those types of information, it would work.

[United Imperial Systems]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanns_Scharff

More humane methods of interrogations exists, while torture works, it's just unethical to use when other, less painful ways exist.

I agree that other methods exist. And I would even agree that they can be situationally more effective.

However, it is a no-brainer to me that when people are tortured... in the event that they do have the information that is actually being sought... they will pretty quickly give the information. If you have anti-torture training (ex special forces) you might be able to hold out for quite a bit longer but again, we are all only human.

Why inflict pain when other methods are available?

[Potthan]

Even if the information given is correct, by the time the criminal gave up the info the people he's working for have already noticed he's missing and likely taken measures to prevent that information being correct (IE: Change of plans or moving to a new position)

[Otira]

Just because torture works on Game of Thrones does not mean it works in real life.

I mean does it even work there? I recall torture scenes in Harrenhal where people just say whatever they think the Lannister soldiers want to hear. It seems like a good example for why torture doesn't work in general.

[Souseiseki]

"torture doesn't work" means that "torture is generally ineffective, usually produces unreliable information and produces significantly more negative and positives in the short term and long term". the fact that torture can produce working information in isolated cases in extremely specific cooked up scenarios does not change this.

for example, yes, you might get some information the criminal, but the net result of that other criminals are going to be much less likely to come forward to you or let themselves be captured alive because you have now established yourself as torturers. you also specifically had to ensure that the criminal had the information because not being able to prove they actually have the information is one of the biggest flaws in terms of torture, so you need to concoct a perfect scenario where all the many downsides of torture don't come up in order to make it sound workable.

[Infected Mushroom]

Torture only reliably works on people who aren't willing to die for the cause, and people who aren't willing to die for the cause don't need to be tortured.

I'd say that even people "willing to die for a cause" will break if the torture is sufficiently harsh (to be honest, it doesn't even necessarily need to be... the body has a natural aversion to pain)

[Infected Mushroom]

Even if the information given is correct, by the time the criminal gave up the info the people he's working for have already noticed he's missing and likely taken measures to prevent that information being correct (IE: Change of plans or moving to a new position)

Perhaps

How long do you anticipate they would be able to realistically hold out though if you're using brutal methods of torture?

[Infected Mushroom]

what is the largest concentration of physical pain that you have endured in your life?

Now imagine that it is being purposefully applied against you until/unless you tell them the information they want. Do you honestly believe that you, under such a situation (or anyone else), could realistically refuse to give the information and keep making things up?

Are all criminals suddenly heroes now?

Not to get too involved, but they say that everyone is the hero of their own story. I don't see why that wouldn't apply to criminals too. They may understand they aren't changing the world but they may still see themselves as defending their own beliefs...or something.

but beliefs allowing them to overcome torture and never yield valuable information that the government is seeking? it just seems.. a bit unrealistic