On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:12:35 -0700, Gerald Peterson wrote: >I think a fun class discussion topic now would be to ask how many >in class would like to have worked for the CIA in helping "interrogate" >such prisoners? Lead in to a focus on the justifications for such actions. >Bring in the Milgram study then and other relevant news info. Many >will gladly act as willing agents if you simulate the post 9-11 context. >Hence, you can talk about the power of situational forces and the >ethical issues of torture vs. potential, but unknown population risks. >All sorts of possibilities and directions for discussion. Next time, in my >social psych class, I want to explore relations between parental political >interests and that of my students as they relate to these and other issues. > - Gary
A few points: (1) Although students might want to "interrogate" detainees (NOTE: the legal status of the people who were interrogated in not always clear because they were being handled outside of the civilian legal system and, it seems, the military legal system; the peculiar status of these detainees is evidenced by the fact that a number of them were simply released after being in detention for years), one should make the distinction between getting useful information and simply getting revenge. One needs to be trained to do the former, one only needs the appropriate strength and support to do the latter. (2) I suggest viewing the two videos featuring form FBI interrogator Jack Cloonan at the Foreign Policy website: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4193 The first point to emphasize is that there is more than one way to make a terrorist cry. Another is that certain myths about interrogation need to be exposed. (3) On the basis of the second video above, one can point out the operation of the availability heuristic and the simulation heuristic (i.e., the ability to imagine a counterfactual situation which affects one's interpretation of the actual event, for example, missing one's jet flight by 5 minutes usually causes more upset than missing it by 30 minutes though, logically, both outcomes are the same but one might be able to imagine how they could have shaved 5 minutes and to have arrived on time). The trashy TV series "24" has be used as an example of how torture might be justified if one has a "ticking bomb" to stop from being exploded. Indeed, some commentators have used "24" as evidence of the usefulness of torture (yes, using fiction as factual evidence). Of course, there appears to be no actual situation where this has occurred (at least none that has been publicly revealed). But, if people have watched the "24" series, they are likely to remember the "ticking bomb" scenario (availability) and to imagine how it might apply in new situations (simulation). Critically evaluating entertainment, infotainment, and what passes to news coverage should be encouraged and we should provide the priniciples on how to do such critical analysis (consider what out physics colleagues have done: http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/ ) (4) It should be clear that the context, the "situation", in which the interrogations were made, supported the use of torture even though historically the U.S. has opposed its use and did not accept the "just following orders" explanation, as shown in the Nuremberg trials. One has to ask why did people feel that if their superiors justified the use of torture it was acceptable to use torture given our history and legal precedents? Has the system become so authoritarian (i.e., one has to submit to authority no matter how morally or intellecually objectionable it is) that it no longer admits to the possibility of error on the part of the people administering it? Have the people working at lower levels, actually interrogating detainees, been selected so that they would not question authority or express dissent? What happens when the system is filled with "Bruno Batta" types? For more info on Bruno Batta and other individuals who were noted by Milgram, see: http://home.swbell.net/revscat/perilsOfObedience.html ("The Perils of Obedience", Milgram 1974, Harper's Magazine) -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
