"Torture Doesn't Work"

[The New California Republic]

If the information can be verified, then what the hell is the point in the torture in the first place? If the information can be verified, then the torturer clearly already has access to all the information they need...

The answer to your first question is obvious. The details/things can only practically be verified after you extract some parameters from the person tortured. For example, think of narrowing down a list of 10,000 suspects to five when you have a deadline or a list of infinite locations to two. This comes up in law enforcement all the time.

You’re using a logical fallacy, it’s not a case of... “hey I can verify 100 percent of all possibilities practically without interrogation” or “I have nothing and I need 100 percent from the person.” And evidence gets verified all the time in investigation after it’s been extracted, happens all the time. This “if I have to verify it then I never needed to narrow down possibilities or even find the evidence to begin with” is bad logic.

"Bad logic" says the person who is advocating for torture to extract information. That's rich!

And it isn't a logical fallacy at all. You seem to think that the information extracted from torture can be verified, I and numerous people have shown you that isn't going to be the case, especially when any truth whatsoever gets obfuscated behind a shower of lies. Torture casts a pall of confusion rather than providing clarity. What if the person is totally innocent? Torture victims usually have not had a trial, guilt has not been ascertained, under torture they will just say whatever they think the torturer wants to hear. Some of that information from the colossal quantity of information that is pouring out between the screams will likely be "true" in a sense, in that it will correspond to some verifiable information. Say enough lies and at least one of them will correspond to the truth in some fashion. So again OP, you are back to square one, the problem of truth and lie. There are clear reasons why torture evidence is not used in many courts of law, not only is it absolutely inhumane and depraved, but the information gained is unreliable.

OK. Second round of the game. The torturer wants to know the phone number of my contact. I give them a phone number. The torturer or one of his cronies calls the number. It is a real phone number, someone answers it! The torturer and his cronies find the poor sod that answered the phone and bring him in for some torturings too. How will they verify that he is my contact?

The answer to your second question is that you would use standard law enforcement questioning and deduction to figure out if they are the contact or not. Hopefully, you tortured the first person because it was a relatively fast way to get to the second person and by narrowing down an otherwise unworkably large (potentially infinite) suspect list.

The contact is refusing to ask questions because they say they have been detained for no good reason, and are totally innocent, as is their right. So now they are likely going to get tortured, to find out whether they are the contact or not, as I don't see why they wouldn't be. Wonderful. What a wonderful system you have here. You are going to torture someone who could be completely innocent, and just happened by coincidence to be at the meeting place. Absolutely monstrous.

[Caracasus]

And the torturer would know what the truth is how?

through physical confirmation generally

And again, historically torture has almost always been a punishment because it is a dreadfully inefficient and useless way of gathering information.

[Des-Bal]

which is why you have to emphasise to them that they should tell you the truth, nothing more nothing less and focus on that... just communicate your demands very clearly

I have been trying for ten minutes, I don't understand how you think that's a solution.

[The New California Republic]

which is why you have to emphasise to them that they should tell you the truth, nothing more nothing less and focus on that... just communicate your demands very clearly

I have been trying for ten minutes, I don't understand how you think that's a solution.

I have been trying a similar thing for the past 24 hours, so I feel your pain. The OP seems to be on a one-track line that always leads towards being a torture apologist and advocate, despite the weighty evidence to the contrary that has been shown to them. I think that trying to convince them otherwise is a pointless exercise to be honest. I just find it frightening that there is a hardcore torture advocate out there.

[Infected Mushroom]

which is why you have to emphasise to them that they should tell you the truth, nothing more nothing less and focus on that... just communicate your demands very clearly

I have been trying for ten minutes, I don't understand how you think that's a solution.

Communication is the key though. You have to let them know what you want from the get go. Its not about saying things that will make the authorities happy, its about the truth. Just say that from the start. Make it clear.

[Vassenor]

which is why you have to emphasise to them that they should tell you the truth, nothing more nothing less and focus on that... just communicate your demands very clearly

And the torturer would know what the truth is how?

If the torturer knows enough to tell if what you are saying is true, they don't need to bother torturing you.

[The New California Republic]

I have been trying for ten minutes, I don't understand how you think that's a solution.

Communication is the key though. You have to let them know what you want from the get go. Its not about saying things that will make the authorities happy, its about the truth. Just say that from the start. Make it clear.

Clear communication and torture. Huh. Now there is a contradiction if ever I have seen one. Sure, I bet the communication will be crystal clear when I am sat in a cell tied to a chair without access to a lawyer or anything, pissing myself out of fear!

You seem to have this ridiculously idealized view of what torture is like, it is inexplicable.

[Vassenor]

Communication is the key though. You have to let them know what you want from the get go. Its not about saying things that will make the authorities happy, its about the truth. Just say that from the start. Make it clear.

Clear communication and torture. Huh. Now there is a contradiction if ever I have seen one. Sure, I bet the communication will be crystal clear when I am sat in a cell tied to a chair without access to a lawyer or anything, pissing myself out of fear!

You seem to have this ridiculously idealized view of what torture is like, it is inexplicable.

But it's always 100% effective on TV so it must work the same in real life!

[Jedi Council]

The main problem with torture is that while it gets information, it can often get the wrong information.

Put through enough torture, I would basically say anything to make it stop. This compulsion, to stop the pain at all costs, means that the truth is meaningless to the prisoner. The prisoners main concern is to stop the torture, and will therefore say or do anything that does this, regardless of whether or not it is reality.

If I were put in a situation where I was being tortured, I am sure that by the end of it I would say the moon was made of cheese and the Earth was flat if that made the pain stop. And therein lies the problem. Any confession under torture is suspect, any information offered up under torture can be unreliable.

There have been studies on this, and, I believe, they support the idea that "enhanced interrogation," really was not all that successful in getting useful information.

[Vassenor]

The main problem with torture is that while it gets information, it can often get the wrong information.

Put through enough torture, I would basically say anything to make it stop. This compulsion, to stop the pain at all costs, means that the truth is meaningless to the prisoner. The prisoners main concern is to stop the torture, and will therefore say or do anything that does this, regardless of whether or not it is reality.

If I were put in a situation where I was being tortured, I am sure that by the end of it I would say the moon was made of cheese and the Earth was flat if that made the pain stop. And therein lies the problem. Any confession under torture is suspect, any information offered up under torture can be unreliable.

There have been studies on this, and, I believe, they support the idea that "enhanced interrogation," really was not all that successful in getting useful information.

THERE. ARE. FOUR. LIGHTS.

[Jedi Council]

The main problem with torture is that while it gets information, it can often get the wrong information.

Put through enough torture, I would basically say anything to make it stop. This compulsion, to stop the pain at all costs, means that the truth is meaningless to the prisoner. The prisoners main concern is to stop the torture, and will therefore say or do anything that does this, regardless of whether or not it is reality.

If I were put in a situation where I was being tortured, I am sure that by the end of it I would say the moon was made of cheese and the Earth was flat if that made the pain stop. And therein lies the problem. Any confession under torture is suspect, any information offered up under torture can be unreliable.

There have been studies on this, and, I believe, they support the idea that "enhanced interrogation," really was not all that successful in getting useful information.

THERE. ARE. FOUR. LIGHTS.

I'd have said five before the torture even began.
F***cking Cardassians.

[The New California Republic]

Clear communication and torture. Huh. Now there is a contradiction if ever I have seen one. Sure, I bet the communication will be crystal clear when I am sat in a cell tied to a chair without access to a lawyer or anything, pissing myself out of fear!

You seem to have this ridiculously idealized view of what torture is like, it is inexplicable.

But it's always 100% effective on TV so it must work the same in real life!

To be honest I find Infected Mushroom's gung-ho advocation and idealization of torture to be creepy as fuck. I am actually disturbed by it, it is really that bad.

THERE. ARE. FOUR. LIGHTS.

I'd have said five before the torture even began.
F***cking Cardassians.

That is one of the best episodes of TNG in my opinion. Patrick Stewart's acting was spot-on.

[Infected Mushroom]

And the torturer would know what the truth is how?

If the torturer knows enough to tell if what you are saying is true, they don't need to bother torturing you.

they know some of the information but not all of it, they need the person's information so they practically narrow down search parameters

[Caracasus]

I have been trying for ten minutes, I don't understand how you think that's a solution.

Communication is the key though. You have to let them know what you want from the get go. Its not about saying things that will make the authorities happy, its about the truth. Just say that from the start. Make it clear.

That doesn't work. Torture is and has almost always been used as punishment throughout history, not as a means of interrogation.

It doesn't work very well as a means of interrogation.

[Jedi Council]

If the torturer knows enough to tell if what you are saying is true, they don't need to bother torturing you.

they know some of the information but not all of it, they need the person's information so they practically narrow down search parameters

But the Torturer cannot know how much the other person knows. What if they spout out random stuff to end the pain and admit to a whole host of falsehoods?

Do you go, verify the information is false, and torture them more? Even if you have gotten everything out of them?

[The New California Republic]

If the torturer knows enough to tell if what you are saying is true, they don't need to bother torturing you.

they know some of the information but not all of it, they need the person's information so they practically narrow down search parameters

Oh please, ditch the euphemisms. Let's call it what it is. It is inflicting unspeakable levels of suffering on someone through wholesome things like pulling teeth, breaking bones, electric shocks, pulling fingernails out, cutting fingers off, hitting them, kicking them, burning them, shouting at them, depriving them of sleep, depriving them of food, and many other unspeakable things.

So don't try to call it any less than what it is. If you are going to promote torture, at least have the decency to acknowledge what it is.

[The Free Joy State]

Communication is the key though. You have to let them know what you want from the get go. Its not about saying things that will make the authorities happy, its about the truth. Just say that from the start. Make it clear.

That doesn't work. Torture is and has almost always been used as punishment throughout history, not as a means of interrogation.

It doesn't work very well as a means of interrogation.

I find Nineteen-Eighty-Four to be quite realistic as a portrayal as the true use of torture (as opposed to this Game of Thrones pseudo-Medieval thing that the OP idolises).

From Section 3, Chapter 3:

"The real power, the power we have to fight for night and day, is not power over things, but over men." [O'Brien] paused, and for a moment assumed again his air of a schoolmaster questioning a promising pupil: "How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?"

Winston thought. "By making him suffer," he said.

"Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing."

Because torture is all about inflicting pain. People who willingly inflict torture are quite often sadists.

And it is useless at extracting helpful information.

So, I am frankly disturbed by anyone who can enthusiastically cheerlead for its use.

[Infected Mushroom]

they know some of the information but not all of it, they need the person's information so they practically narrow down search parameters

But the Torturer cannot know how much the other person knows. What if they spout out random stuff to end the pain and admit to a whole host of falsehoods?

Do you go, verify the information is false, and torture them more? Even if you have gotten everything out of them?

something along those lines yes

[Infected Mushroom]

they know some of the information but not all of it, they need the person's information so they practically narrow down search parameters

Oh please, ditch the euphemisms. Let's call it what it is. It is inflicting unspeakable levels of suffering on someone through wholesome things like pulling teeth, breaking bones, electric shocks, pulling fingernails out, cutting fingers off, hitting them, kicking them, burning them, shouting at them, depriving them of sleep, depriving them of food, and many other unspeakable things.

So don't try to call it any less than what it is. If you are going to promote torture, at least have the decency to acknowledge what it is.

where in the thread did I advocate it?

saying something works situationally is not the same as advocating it as a go-to strategy

[Risottia]

Torture doesn't work because the torturer has no actual way to know whether rhe tortured is telling the truth or merely confirming the torturer's bias to avoid pain.

Some time could be wasted if the person is giving up false information, but there are definitely ways to confirm. Its quite useless in extracting a foolproof confession but if you're looking to extract actual information such as numbers, locations, names then it would definitely be extracted (if the person has the information).

I don't know about you...

But if I have information they want and I'm getting tortured, I might make up some information once (maybe even twice) to buy me some reprieve if I'm feeling particularly brave. But the knowledge that wasting their time will make the return of the torture inevitable (and will probably amplify the methods) would be a strong disincentive.

So basically you're wasting time. Not the best way to get crucial info.

[Caracasus]

Oh please, ditch the euphemisms. Let's call it what it is. It is inflicting unspeakable levels of suffering on someone through wholesome things like pulling teeth, breaking bones, electric shocks, pulling fingernails out, cutting fingers off, hitting them, kicking them, burning them, shouting at them, depriving them of sleep, depriving them of food, and many other unspeakable things.

So don't try to call it any less than what it is. If you are going to promote torture, at least have the decency to acknowledge what it is.

where in the thread did I advocate it?

saying something works situationally is not the same as advocating it as a go-to strategy

It doesn't work situationaly as a way of gathering intelligence.

Torture has almost always been used historically as a means of punishment, not interrogation.

It doesn't work on any real and meaningful level as a method of interrogation.

[The Free Joy State]

Oh please, ditch the euphemisms. Let's call it what it is. It is inflicting unspeakable levels of suffering on someone through wholesome things like pulling teeth, breaking bones, electric shocks, pulling fingernails out, cutting fingers off, hitting them, kicking them, burning them, shouting at them, depriving them of sleep, depriving them of food, and many other unspeakable things.

So don't try to call it any less than what it is. If you are going to promote torture, at least have the decency to acknowledge what it is.

where in the thread did I advocate it?

saying something works situationally is not the same as advocating it as a go-to strategy

Umm... You literally advocated it in the post right above this one.

But the Torturer cannot know how much the other person knows. What if they spout out random stuff to end the pain and admit to a whole host of falsehoods?

Do you go, verify the information is false, and torture them more? Even if you have gotten everything out of them?

something along those lines yes

Just to note, you answered to the affirmative when asked if you should torture people some more -- even when they have no information -- if they give false information.

Sounds like promoting torture to me!

[Jedi Council]

But the Torturer cannot know how much the other person knows. What if they spout out random stuff to end the pain and admit to a whole host of falsehoods?

Do you go, verify the information is false, and torture them more? Even if you have gotten everything out of them?

something along those lines yes

But that is not effective as it does nothing to make the information you receive any more reliable, not to mention is morally abhorrent, seeing as though you did just say we should torture people who do not have more information left to provide.
Again, when tortured, a person's primary goal is to end the torture, not tell the truth, it does not work due to this problem.

And saying, "Oh we will just tell them that the truth will end the torture so they will tell the truth," is a ludicrous idea.

[The New California Republic]

Oh please, ditch the euphemisms. Let's call it what it is. It is inflicting unspeakable levels of suffering on someone through wholesome things like pulling teeth, breaking bones, electric shocks, pulling fingernails out, cutting fingers off, hitting them, kicking them, burning them, shouting at them, depriving them of sleep, depriving them of food, and many other unspeakable things.

So don't try to call it any less than what it is. If you are going to promote torture, at least have the decency to acknowledge what it is.

where in the thread did I advocate it?

saying something works situationally is not the same as advocating it as a go-to strategy

Consistently defending it against any and all criticisms put forward by a whole host of people on this thread goes far beyond that. It is advocating torture as a legitimate means of getting information.

You are promoting torture. Sorry to break it to you, but you are. It isn't just me that has noticed it.

something along those lines yes

Just to note, you answered to the affirmative when asked if you should torture people some more -- even when they have no information -- if they give false information.

Sounds like promoting torture to me!

Yup. Infected Mushroom is promoting torture. Again, I am actually disturbed by that.

[New haven america]

Because the person being tortured will make up anything to get it to end, usually including lying and making everyone's lives and jobs harder.

The world isn't like GoT, torture is a notoriously bad way to collect information.