With all of the reporting about the torture of Iraqi prisoners, quite a lot of discussion about the morality of torture generally and the treatment of Iraqis specifically has been going on. Some, however, refuse to discuss the issue at all. Why? It’s just too “icky” of a topic.

Eugene Volokh writes:

I just don't like this topic. I find it not just difficult but also sickening. Torture is disgusting. Failing to stop the next terrorist attack that kills thousands is awful. Does the need to save people's lives justify torturing suspects? How many lives? Would it take hundreds of thousands (as in the hidden nuclear bomb scenario)? Thousands? Dozens? A couple? I don't know the answers, and while I have no doubt about the importance of the questions, I don't enjoy thinking about them. The whole topic is sad and horrible, whatever the right answer is. It's not a rational reaction; it's a visceral one. I'm not proud of my squeamishness, but there it is.

[I]f I had a choice in how to invest my scarce time, I'd rather not invest it here. And fortunately I do have a choice. If I had to think about torture, I would. If I were paid for it, or if I were given a position of official responsibility which requited me to think about it, or if I was teaching a class or writing an article that would be incomplete without it, then I'd buckle down and do it. But none of these applies here. ... I'm fortunate to be in a position where I can choose the topics I focus on.

Is torture a difficult and disturbing topic? Of course. Does that mean that it is acceptable to dismiss it and refuse to talk or think about it, even when there is good reason to think that it is being done in our name? Of course not. What an absurd conclusion to reach. If people are being abused, harmed, and killed in our name, we have a responsibility to think and talk about it. This isn’t simply an intellectual responsibility, it is a moral responsibility.

If people are being tortured and killed in our name, it is up to us to determine whether any of it is justified. If so, we must bear witness to that and take responsibility for what happens to others. If not, we must take responsibility for our failure to stop thing earlier and take whatever measures are necessary in order to stop things now. Nothing less is even remotely acceptable.

Is there anyone who enjoys writing about torture? I would hope not. Is there anyone who enjoys thinking about torture? Again, I would hope not. It is not, however, necessary to have professional expertise in order to comment on torture being done in your name. The suffering of other human beings is not something that requires an advanced degree in order to have intelligent comments on.

If there is anything more morally reprehensible than torturing a person, it is refusing to talk about the morality of torture when it is being done in your name because it is just too “icky.” Life is “icky,” but we don’t have the option — morally or professionally — to ignore the icky aspects and thus allow the suffering of others to continue without comment. How we react to the abuse and torture of other human beings says a lot about us. Failing to say anything speaks loudly, more loudly than words, about the quality our character.

Kieran and Mark Kleiman also comment on Volokh’s post.

Read More:

• Guide to Ethics and Morality
• News About Ethics
• Bioethics
• Ethics and Culture
• Privacy & Autonomy
• War and Morality