The ticking time bomb scenario is the canonical utilitarian justification for torture

Evidence

These brutal practices were justified using the ticking time bomb metaphor. In this scenario an individual knows the location of a ticking time bomb that will kill countless people when it explodes. The utilitarian justification condones torturing the person to get the location, because it saves the lives of many. In a correlated justification, the CIA claimed that torture worked, allegedly enabling the CIA to abort terrorist plots and to capture of al Qaeda officials (Rose, 2008). — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 2371 (#expands, via linked claim)

Richard Cody then argued for the necessity of torture, properly managed. Proper management, sensible policies, agreed procedures—it was possible, after all, to civilise something as barbaric as warfare with the Geneva Convention, and now we needed a Geneva Convention on how we might conduct torture in a civilised fashion. — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 371 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Exonerating comparison relies heavily on moral justification by utilitarian standards. Making violence morally acceptable from a utilitarian perspective is facilitated by two sets of judgments. First, nonviolent options are depicted as ineffective for achieving desired changes, thus removing them from consideration. Second, utilitarian analyses using advantageous comparisons affirm that one’s injurious actions will prevent more human suffering than they cause. The utilitarian cost-benefit calculus, however, can be quite slippery in specific applications. Estimates of future harm contain many uncertainties and ambiguities. Predictive judgment is, therefore, subject to many biases (Nisbett & Ross, 1980). As a result, calculations of long-term human costs and benefits are often suspect. Estimating the gravity of potential threats also is fraught with subjectivity. Moreover, violence is often used as a weapon against minor threats on the grounds that if left unchecked, they will escalate and spread to cause far more human suffering. The frequently invoked domino theory reflects this type of escalative projection error concerning a likely course of events. Estimate of the gravity of a situation justifies choice of options. But preference for violent options often biases estimates of gravity. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 394 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: The ticking-time-bomb scenario legitimized torture through utilitarian reasoning — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 2371; Liberal-rationalist rhetoric can normalize torture as a managed procedure — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 371; Utilitarian justifications for violence rest on biased estimates of future harm — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 394 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• The ticking-time-bomb scenario legitimized torture through utilitarian reasoning #expands (0.95) — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 2371
• Liberal-rationalist rhetoric can normalize torture as a managed procedure #complicates (0.78) — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 371
• Utilitarian justifications for violence rest on biased estimates of future harm #complicates (0.74) — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 394