2012/12/01 by Jeremy Davies · 1 citation
Medicine · Psychology · Social Sciences · #American Constitutional Law and Politics #Argument (complex analysis) #Epistemology #Historical and Scientific Studies #Human rights #Jeremy bentham #Law #Medicine #Philosophy #Political science #Psychoanalysis #Psychology #Sociology #Torture #Torture, Ethics, and Law #Utilitarianism
paper · pdf · doi:10.16995/ntn.643
openalex publication_date 2012/12/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
Jeremy Bentham has frequently been regarded as the father of the ‘ticking bomb’ argument in defence of interrogational torture. The first part of this article draws attention to a transformation in his theory of torture between about 1777 and 1804. His later work anticipates the modern utilitarian case for torture to a striking extent, whereas his earlier writings – although they too defend the practice – are alien to widespread contemporary assumptions. In the second part I argue that those early torture writings have substantial implications for Bentham’s philosophy as a whole. Bentham equivocates as to whether or not physical pain can exert irresistible control over its victim’s will. Intense bodily hurt may become a kind of psychological absolute, one that is perhaps necessary to his thought but is at odds with his principle that all motivations can be traded off against others. (Image: Anon, Jeremy Bentham, oil on canvas. Credit: © UCL Art Museum, University College London)