The Scenario Of The Time Bomb Terrorist Gives You The Opport

The scenario of the time bomb terrorist gives you the opportunity to a

The scenario of the time bomb terrorist gives you the opportunity to ask yourself what you would do in this extreme circumstance. Consider if you were placed in such a situation — many lives are in danger because of a bomb. You are in a position where you have the terrorist in custody but he or she is refusing to give you the information needed to stop the bomb. Could torturing one person lead to the greater good — saving the lives of many? In your assignment address each of the following points.

What would a utilitarian do in this situation? Why? What would a Buddhist do in this situation? Why? What would you do in this situation? Why? Your paper should be 3-4 pages in length in APA format. Submit your completed assignment to the drop box below. Please check the Course Calendar for specific due dates. Save your assignment as a Microsoft Word document. (Mac users, please remember to append the ".docx" extension to the filename.) The name of the file should be your first initial and last name, followed by an underscore and the name of the assignment, and an underscore and the date. An example is shown below: Jstudent_exampleproblem_101504

Paper For Above instruction

The ethical dilemma posed by the hypothetical scenario of a terrorist with a time bomb underscores complex moral, philosophical, and cultural considerations about how to act in life-threatening situations. This paper explores the perspectives of utilitarianism, Buddhism, and personal moral judgment concerning the question of whether torturing a suspect to save many lives can be justified, analyzing each viewpoint's underlying principles and implications.

Utilitarian Perspective

Utilitarianism, fundamentally rooted in consequentialism, advocates for actions that maximize overall happiness and minimize suffering (Mill, 1863). In the context of the hostage situation involving the terrorist and the bomb, a utilitarian would likely endorse torturing the suspect if it results in saving a greater number of lives. This approach prioritizes the preservation of human life and the well-being of the majority over individual rights or moral rules against torture (Singer, 2011). According to utilitarian principles, the potential to prevent hundreds of deaths outweighs the moral cost of inflicting pain on one person. However, critics argue that this perspective can lead to moral erosion, justifying torture in any context where the outcome appears beneficial, thus raising concerns about the instrumentalization of human dignity (Shue, 1989).

Buddhist Perspective

Buddhism emphasizes compassion, non-harm, and the inherent dignity of all beings (Rahula, 1974). From a Buddhist standpoint, causing harm—even to a terrorist—is rooted in the principle of ahimsa, or non-violence. Buddhists advocate for compassion towards all individuals, even those who commit atrocities (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1991). Therefore, torture as a means to extract information would be incompatible with Buddhist ethics, which emphasize alleviating suffering and cultivating mindfulness and compassion (Gombrich, 2006). The Buddhist approach would discourage harmful actions, emphasizing intervention methods that do not violate karmic principles of non-harm, such as offering spiritual support or seeking non-violent means to resolve the crisis.

Personal Reflection and Conclusion

Personally, faced with such extreme circumstances, I believe that torture is unjustifiable because it undermines my moral integrity and the principles of human rights I uphold. I would seek alternative means of eliciting information, such as psychological tactics or negotiation, that respect the individual's dignity and adhere to ethical standards. I recognize the tension between the imperative to save lives and the moral costs associated with torture. Ultimately, I would prioritize non-violent, humane approaches while endeavoring to protect innocent lives through lawful and ethical means. This stance aligns with both moral integrity and the long-term societal benefits of upholding human rights and dignity.

References

• Gombrich, R. (2006).The Philokalia: The Complete Text. Oxford University Press.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). A Utilitarian View of Life. The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume X.
• Rahula, W. (1974). What the Buddha Taught. Grove Press.
• Shue, H. (1989). Torture and Impartiality: A Critical Look at Utilitarianism. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 18(2), 146-169.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Thich Nhat Hanh. (1991). Living Buddha, Living Christ. Riverhead Books.