Application Paper on a Kantian’s Moral Solution

Have you ever been in a dilemma situation? A situation where you aim to do two things that have good motives but you are only required to choose one. In every action, we take we should first consider if it is morally right. For instance, torturing a person to reveal a bomb that he has set in an area where other people live is not morally right. In such a case ethical issues should be applied. Torturing is illegal and should only be done with the approval of the court warrant to torture a person to reveal a bomb to save many lives. According to Kant, the goodwill of a person chooses to do its moral duty (Sullivan, 1989). Torturing might lead to death which is not morally right according to the law, but torturing one person to reveal a set bomb is a good motive since many lives will be saved.

Torturing a human being is violating human dignity. Although it is unethical to torture it is also unethical to let thousands of people die. In such cases, interrogations procedures that respect human dignity should be used to get information from the suspect terrorist (Dershowitz, 2002). Kant suggests that it is acceptable to do something morally wrong but with good intentions no matter the consequences. He says that consequences do not matter and that good consequences cannot justify wrong actions (Sullivan, 1989). Interrogating experts should not use torture or abusive language to the suspect, they should focus on using effective ways to obtain reliable information. Interrogators’ aim should not be to make a suspect talk but to get credible information that will assist in solving the problem involved.

However, in a case where interrogators fail to get reliable information they are left in a dilemma not knowing what to do. In other words, they end up violating the law, but with good intentions without considering the consequences afterward. In this case, the interrogators and the suspect are the main stakeholders who are negatively affected by the situation involved. However, every decision taken should not violate human dignity.

Every human being should be respected regardless of ethnicity, gender, or status. Kartn suggests that human beings should be treated equally without discrimination. For instance, the suspect involved should be treated equally to others. Kant’s view on categorical imperative is that one should do what is the moral law, for instance, one should work hard to succeed. The same case applies to the interrogators, for them to get credible information they should interrogate the suspect and not torture. When suspects are treated well there are high chances of getting reliable information the same way one has to drink water to get away with thirst. The categorical imperative is always a negative test where one has to do something to achieve better results out of it (Sullivan 1989). It is also one of the problems associated with Kant’s moral theory.

Although some suspects may decide not to talk torturing is not the best way not make them talk. Professionals should be involved to interrogate the suspect, the option will have no harm and might produce good results. In Kant’s view on the moral categorical imperative, many things that one would do always seem to be a moral obligation. For instance, interrogators might want to torture a suspect which is morally wrong in the same case to the suspect who might want to tell the truth but the consequences that will follow make them remain silent. Respect for human rights, enhancing equality and allowing others to participate in decision-making show the presence of economic justice (Bersoff et.al, 1993). In decision-making principles of bioethics should be enhanced to allow the suspect to have self-determination and respect and also give a path for other stakeholders to get justice.

References

Sullivan, R. J. (1989). Immanuel Kant’s moral theory. Cambridge University Press.

Dershowitz, A. (2002). Torturing The Ticking Bomb Terrorist: An Analysis Of Judicially Sanctioned Torture In The Context Of Terrorism. Bc.edu.https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bctwj/23_1/05_FMS.htm

Bersoff, D. N., & Koeppl, P. M. (1993). The relation between ethical codes and moral principles. Ethics & behavior, 3(3-4), 345-357.