Norms, perverse effects, and torture

Bibliographic Data

ID12915909
AuthorsWilliam L d’Ambruoso (University of Washington, corresponding author)
Year2015
Volume7
Issue1
Pages33-60
Publication date2015-02-09
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Theory (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1752-9719 • E-ISSN: 1752-9727
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s1752971914000396
OpenAlexW2154314180
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited48

If torture is both ethically odious and usually ineffective as an interrogation method, why have states, especially democratic ones, practiced it? This paper develops a theoretical response to this puzzle by extending constructivist understandings of normative effects. I argue that the norm prohibiting torture has the perverse effect of making torture more attractive to some political leaders in two ways: first, the norm attracts those who are looking for an outside-the-box solution to challenging intelligence-gathering scenarios; second, the norm offers political leaders a narrative of heroism in which they sacrifice their morality for the greater good. I illustrate these explanations with the example of torture in the United States war on terror. My argument suggests that norms can shape the interests even of those who do not follow their scripts, implying that the scope of normative impact may be much wider than previously believed

Argument (complex analysis · Criminology · Democracy · Epistemology · Human rights · Interrogation · Law and economics · Morality · Norm (philosophy · Normative · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Terrorism · Torture · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Law · Philosophy · Torture, Ethics, and Law · War, Ethics, and Justification

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub