"Torture Doesn't Work"

[Infected Mushroom]

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.

Well, not really. You'll give the information that the torturers want to hear. If we look back at the Knights Templar, they were tortured and imprisoned by agents of King Phillip. And newer initiates in the Order admitted to sodomy, heresy and blasphemy just to make the torture stop. And if the leaders of the Order denied these accusations, they were put to death.

I agree that its not very useful in terms of extracting confessions. But if you're looking for actual information that can be verified through other means and where the person tortured does have that information... I can't see how it wouldn't be extracted.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

But how do you know that whatever is said is true or not?

the same way you know any other physical evidence is true or not?

The hard way?

[The New California Republic]

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.

1. How long would you be able to hold out? A few minutes? 1 hour? Days? Months? Years? Try to estimate.

It depends on the specific methodology, what information they specifically want, and my overall mental state/morale at the time. For example, if they wanted info that I think wouldn't actually cause much harm, then I'd give it to them. If I had a specific reason for not giving the information, such as protecting a loved one or a particular cause, then I'd hold out far longer.

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?

The Stasi stopped using more overt methods of torture in the 1970's, partially because they signed the 1975 Helsinki Accords regarding human rights, but also because torture was too crude, obvious, and often counterproductive. The new methods of the Stasi, Zersetzung, were far more productive than 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?

Probably not.

[Vistulange]

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)

Again, the point isn't that a person won't yield. They will. Everybody breaks under a certain amount of duress.

The thing is, after that point, said person will be saying everything and anything just to make the torture stop. At that point, the torturer has no way of knowing what is the truth, what is partially the truth, and what is purely made up in order to satisfy the torturer just so the pain stops.

[Thermodolia]

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

Well the best way to get it to stop is to actually add bits of truths that they most likely would have known anyway. That way the shit you’re spewing takes them forever to figure out

[Thermodolia]

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.

Psychological torture is the worst. And is usually what the CIA uses if they have time.

[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

Well the best way to get it to stop is to actually add bits of truths that they most likely would have known anyway. That way the shit you’re spewing takes them forever to figure out

but you don't want them to take forever to figure things out... because if you do that, you will likely be tortured even longer no?

I mean, it's easy to say:

"Hey if I'm tortured it would NEVER WORK ON ME. I'd keep making things up and giving them the smart mouth. They will NEVER get anything from me because I believe in what is right."

But it just doesn't play out that way in real life...

[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.

Psychological torture is the worst. And is usually what the CIA uses if they have time.

Maybe, but it's better than physical torture, since Scharff befriended and was generally nice to the people he interrogated.
So pshychological torture is the lesser of two evils here, in my opinion at least.

[The South Falls]

including the information that the authorities want right?

This also works on the assumption the tortured individual actually has the information you want.

Also, """"""""authorities."""""""" lol, like any """"""""authority"""""""" who resorts to torture deserves to have authority.

If you can't get info out through other means, you're no better than a mob of uniforms.

[Thermodolia]

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.

Que? You literally just admitted that you might get false information.

[Hammer Britannia]

This is literally torture avocation, you should feel ashamed of yourself IM

[The New California Republic]

psychological torture is the lesser of two evils here, in my opinion at least.

It really isn't...

[Infected Mushroom]

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.

Que? You literally just admitted that you might get false information.

You might get false information using any method. However, saying "torture doesn't work" necessarily implies that you could never get any true information. And that is simply indefensible.

[Thermodolia]

Psychological torture is the worst. And is usually what the CIA uses if they have time.

Maybe, but it's better than physical torture, since Scharff befriended and was generally nice to the people he interrogated.
So pshychological torture is the lesser of two evils here, in my opinion at least.

No I’m just saying that I could resist physical torture a hell of a lot more easier than psychological torture.

[The South Falls]

Psychological torture is the worst. And is usually what the CIA uses if they have time.

Maybe, but it's better than physical torture, since Scharff befriended and was generally nice to the people he interrogated.
So pshychological torture is the lesser of two evils here, in my opinion at least.

People have quite literally gone insane because of that type of torture.

[Azadistan-land of the free]

Que? You literally just admitted that you might get false information.

You might get false information using any method. However, saying "torture doesn't work" necessarily implies that you could never get any true information. And that is simply indefensible.

I agree saying it never works is not defensible but saying it is not a very good method efficacy wise is highly defensible

[Vistulange]

Que? You literally just admitted that you might get false information.

You might get false information using any method. However, saying "torture doesn't work" necessarily implies that you could never get any true information. And that is simply indefensible.

It doesn't work, because the volume of false information is much more likely to outweigh the volume of information which can be translated into intelligence. The amount of effort and resources needed to translate information gathered through torture into intelligence is impractical most of the time. Hence, outright torture is generally ineffective, and is considered to not work.

Time and resources are not limitless. It takes time and effort to sift through information. If the volume of useless information is too big, it's just impractical to sift through it, because the torturer has no way of verifying the information outside of what the tortured is saying.

[Genivaria]

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.

It's very simple, the torture victim will say anything to make the pain stop.
People 'confessed' to being witches under torture.

[Sougra]

this sounds like one hell of a painful situation to be in TBH...

What exactly do you mean by this? You mean emotional manipulation, yeah, it is. But in your OP, you specifically mentioned physical torture, not any other forms that don't rely on it. There are multiple ways to emotionally and psychologically manipulate a person to get the information you want, and they're much more successful and is more humane to the general population than torture. There's not much reason to endorse torture when there's so many other ways to get information in a more reliable manner.

[Genivaria]

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)

....no.

[Vistulange]

this sounds like one hell of a painful situation to be in TBH...

What exactly do you mean by this? You mean emotional manipulation, yeah, it is. But in your OP, you specifically mentioned physical torture, not any other forms that don't rely on it. There are multiple ways to emotionally and psychologically manipulate a person to get the information you want, and they're much more successful and is more humane to the general population than torture. There's not much reason to endorse torture when there's so many other ways to get information in a more reliable manner.

As mentioned above, it's not exactly "more humane". It may not leave physical marks, but psychological torture has, as stated by other posters, made people go literally insane. No form of torture is "humane" in any sense of the word. Its effectiveness can be debated, but its "humaneness" simply can't be.

[Internationalist Bastard]

It’s not reliable
Eventually you’ll just say shit to stop the torture, and many people are trained to resist. It’s just not the best way to get results
No, optimally you’d convince them to talk, and failing that you’d have leverage. I wouldn’t rely on tour tire intel if my life depended on it

[The South Falls]

Let's take 1945. The Americans needed information from the Japanese, as to where their factories, munitions plants, and shit were. They stationed interpreters there, and provided the Japanese with bunks of two people. What they would do, was provide them with the best things possible, and they'd talk to their comrades. America put mics in the room, and got valuable information. With no torture. Torture would have caused them to hold out more.

[Thermodolia]

Well the best way to get it to stop is to actually add bits of truths that they most likely would have known anyway. That way the shit you’re spewing takes them forever to figure out

but you don't want them to take forever to figure things out... because if you do that, you will likely be tortured even longer no?

That’s not how it works. See when you torture someone you have to decode the jumble mess of information that they spew. Which takes time. Meaning that if you leave enough truths in the jumbled mess of information than it will take them a long ass time to figure out what is false and what is true. Which means for that time they wouldn’t be torturing you.

The other method is to blatantly lie. And created your own truth mixed in with actual truths.

They record everything you say which they will then have to go back through to figure out what the hell you said was true or not.

I mean, it's easy to say:

"Hey if I'm tortured it would NEVER WORK ON ME. I'd keep making things up and giving them the smart mouth. They will NEVER get anything from me because I believe in what is right."

But it just doesn't play out that way in real life...

But it does. I would rather die than betray when I stand in and my country. And I’ve taken a torture resistance class before so I can resist for quite a bit.

Honestly the vast majority of resisting comes from those who have high will power, aka those who are willing to die to protect information

[Internationalist Bastard]

Let's take 1945. The Americans needed information from the Japanese, as to where their factories, munitions plants, and shit were. They stationed interpreters there, and provided the Japanese with bunks of two people. What they would do, was provide them with the best things possible, and they'd talk to their comrades. America put mics in the room, and got valuable information. With no torture. Torture would have caused them to hold out more.

Same thing the British did with German officers. Far better to let them drop their guard and pick up chatter