Torture Is Never Justified

Many societies use torture as way of extracting information from people who will not easily give up much needed information. Torture is a topic of controversy in our world and has been for years now. Although torture may work in some instances, studies repeatedly show over and over that it is not effective. Oftentimes, people will say anything and even provide incorrect information to stop the suffering. I have analyzed opinion articles such as Torture is Morally Reprehensible by Kim Petersen and Torture is Never Justified by Nikki Burgess. Both articles display a negative opinion on the topic of torture. Although the scholarly article is written by professionals like Petersen and is peer reviewed, it is a weaker paper in my opinion compared to the popular article written by Burgess. Burgess’ paper uses a variety of ethos, pathos, and logos throughout the article whereas Petersen’s paper was quite limited in these writing techniques. Ethos, pathos, and logos are appeals that writers use to prove their point. Ethos has to do with credibility. An example …show more content…
Burgess writes about how “torture tactics rarely- if ever - [leads] to intelligence acquisition” and that treating people humanely by “utilizing rapport and psychology [has] historically proven successful” (Burgess). Being able to debunk the opposing side is something that Burgess exceeds at doing. Therefore, her paper is extremely efficient at proposing her opinion and even persuading the reader. Once again, Petersen’s paper does not meet up to the standards of Burgess’ paper. Petersen’s article does an awful job at explaining why torture is morally unacceptable. When little or no information is provided to back up a claim, the argument is invalid. Without the supporting evidence, there is no structure and therefore the argument can easily be