Poll of the Day > Ethics question: Is it alright to use the information gained via torture

(+) Yeah! (+)

Rules:

-Torture is ethically wrong in this context

-Someone tortured anyway and gained information

...

Is it ethical to use that information?

Hypothetical example: German scientists Mengele/Heim did absolutely horrid experiments during WW2, but suppose their torturous experimentation found a cure for cancer/malaria/whatever

Is it ethical to use such cure?

On the one hand, you don't want to validate torture - but on the other hand, what's done is done why waste what you've gained?
---

i feel like it's not ethically right for you to post on this board any more, ok?
---

Germans did some awful experiments in WW II. They learned a lot, such as ways to deal with burns, effects of lack of water/ only drinking salt water, and poisons. We can't change the past, but can use it to further our own knowledge.

Our country has used different types of torture to get information from captives, as has every country in history. That info has or helped us during wartime. Use it if you got it

Lokarin posted...

Hypothetical example: German scientists Mengele/Heim did absolutely horrid experiments during WW2, but suppose their torturous experimentation found a cure for cancer/malaria/whatever

I am pretty sure his research or research like it led to results we still utilize.
---

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Lokarin posted...

Hypothetical example: German scientists Mengele/Heim did absolutely horrid experiments during WW2, but suppose their torturous experimentation found a cure for cancer/malaria/whatever

I am pretty sure his research or research like it led to results we still utilize.

Half of the worlds rocketry can be accredited to the germans

They were so scientifically advanced they wouldnt have lost 1v1 against any nation if the time

Good thing in wars quantity usually beats out quality
---

Lokarin posted...

Torture is ethically wrong in this context

---

If the harm has already been done, I'm not sure what the issue is with using the information considering that it's not like not using the information somehow makes things any better. Of course, that's provided that the torturers/murderers are brought to justice for their crimes and that this isn't a constant issue where the usage of said information led to more torture. Granted, supposedly torture doesn't often generate actionable intel (and many terrorist suspects have no information in the first place) so it's somewhat of a moot point.
---

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/06/do-doctors-use-nazi-data-in-their-research.html

CTLM posted...

Germans did some awful experiments in WW II. They learned a lot, such as ways to deal with burns, effects of lack of water/ only drinking salt water, and poisons. We can't change the past, but can use it to further our own knowledge.

This is by and large untrue

---

Using a link without a cookie wall that breaks the law might help.
---

Yes
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/06/do-doctors-use-nazi-data-in-their-research.html

CTLM posted...

Germans did some awful experiments in WW II. They learned a lot, such as ways to deal with burns, effects of lack of water/ only drinking salt water, and poisons. We can't change the past, but can use it to further our own knowledge.

This is by and large untrue

this isnt proof by any means but do you really think medical institutions would come out and go yep, we use things nazis discovered in procedures!
---

You have to use it. Otherwise not only are you condemning a great many future people to unnecessary suffering or even death. But you also make the lives lost finding that information mean nothing.
---

DirtBasedSoap posted...

Doctor Foxx posted...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/06/do-doctors-use-nazi-data-in-their-research.html

CTLM posted...

Germans did some awful experiments in WW II. They learned a lot, such as ways to deal with burns, effects of lack of water/ only drinking salt water, and poisons. We can't change the past, but can use it to further our own knowledge.

This is by and large untrue

this isnt proof by any means but do you really think medical institutions would come out and go yep, we use things nazis discovered in procedures!

So far, no one seems to have been able to:

- identify any of the breakthroughs supposedly made by the Nazis in their research;
- confirm that the Nazis actually left detailed records of this research behind, instead of destroying them;
- demonstrate that anyone recovered such records;
- highlight Nazi research findings of any actual value (which isn't the same thing as the field of research potentially yielding benefits);
- point to any examples of Nazi research having been used in any way;
- explain how this research was disseminated to whoever's supposed to have made use of it.

All I've ever heard on this subject is "OMG Nazis did medical experiments in the camps the world of medical science must have taken huge leaps forward because the Nazis were geniuses." From what I've read, what the Nazis primarily discovered was that if you immerse someone in very cold water for long enough they die of hypothermia and if you deprive them of oxygen for long enough, they die of anoxia/asphyxiation. Nazi researchers like Rascher and Mengele seem to have behaved like enthusiastic amateurs rather than serious scientists, motivated more by morbid curiosity -- like sadistic children pulling the legs off insects.
---

Why would you torture someone for information to not use it? Seems like a silly premise.

Firewerx posted...

So far, no one seems to have been able to:

- identify any of the breakthroughs supposedly made by the Nazis in their research
- confirm that the Nazis actually left detailed records behind instead of destroying them
- demonstrate that anyone recovered such records
- highlight Nazi research findings of any actual value
- point to any examples of Nazi research having been used in any way
- explain how this research was transmitted to whoever's supposed to have made use of it.

All I've ever heard on this subject is "OMG Nazi did medical experiments in the camps the world of medical science must have taken huge leaps forward because the Nazis were geniuses." From what I've read, what the Nazis primarily discovered was that if you immerse someone in very cold water for long enough they die of hypothermia and if you deprive them of oxygen for long enough, they die of anoxia/asphyxiation. Nazi researchers like Rascher and Mengele seem to have behaved like enthusiastic amateurs rather than serious scientists, motivated more by morbid curiosity -- like sadistic children pulling the legs off insects.

If you read about some of the things people admitted to during the Nuremberg Trials, you'll hear some information
Here's some more
https://remember.org/educate/medexp

People found information that was useful. People didn't just make this up about the experiments. Seems like people want to deny this ever happening NOW even though there is documentation of it, people admitted it occurred and survivors talked about their experiences of going through it

CTLM posted...

Firewerx posted...

So far, no one seems to have been able to:

- identify any of the breakthroughs supposedly made by the Nazis in their research
- confirm that the Nazis actually left detailed records behind instead of destroying them
- demonstrate that anyone recovered such records
- highlight Nazi research findings of any actual value
- point to any examples of Nazi research having been used in any way
- explain how this research was transmitted to whoever's supposed to have made use of it.

All I've ever heard on this subject is "OMG Nazi did medical experiments in the camps the world of medical science must have taken huge leaps forward because the Nazis were geniuses." From what I've read, what the Nazis primarily discovered was that if you immerse someone in very cold water for long enough they die of hypothermia and if you deprive them of oxygen for long enough, they die of anoxia/asphyxiation. Nazi researchers like Rascher and Mengele seem to have behaved like enthusiastic amateurs rather than serious scientists, motivated more by morbid curiosity -- like sadistic children pulling the legs off insects.

If you read about some of the things people admitted to during the Nuremberg Trials, you'll hear some information
Here's some more
https://remember.org/educate/medexp

People found information that was useful. People didn't just make this up about the experiments. Seems like people want to deny this ever happening NOW even though there is documentation of it, people admitted it occurred and survivors talked about their experiences of going through it

I've been well aware for many years that the Nazis conducted numerous medical experiments on unwilling human subjects. What I'm disputing is that their horror actually yielded genuine benefits for medical science. We know that if you immerse people in icy water, or lock them in decompression chambers, or deprive them of food or water for long enough, they die -- often horribly. We didn't need the fucking Nazis to tell us that. Even the German army must have scratched its head wondering how medics in the field could possibly exploit the surprising "scientific discovery" that if you pump scalding hot water into someone's digestive tract, they die.

What I'm asking for is any concrete proof that these experiments in pseudo-scientific sadism actually improved our understanding of the limits of human endurance in ways that saved lives, or contributed significantly to the development of new treatments. All I've ever read are baseless assumptions that because the Nazis weren't constrained by ethical boundaries, they must have pushed the limits of medical science and we're all somehow indirectly benefiting from these experiments.
---

Sit right here in this chair Lok.
---

PKMNsony posted...

Why would you torture someone for information to not use it? Seems like a silly premise.

What should be asked: Why would you torture anyone, especially when it doesn't provide useful information?

https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/campaigns/never-torture/facts-torture

---

so its ethically wrong to torture information out of someone, even if a large amount of people will die if you don't? Okay.
---

It doesnt matter how you get the truth, you have to use it for actual justice to prevail.

If some video was recorded against the rules but proves somebody guilty, it still needs to count. Charge the person who broke the rules to get it with something if you want as well.

Raddest_Chad posted...

It doesnt matter how you get the truth, you have to use it for actual justice to prevail.

If some video was recorded against the rules but proves somebody guilty, it still needs to count. Charge the person who broke the rules to get it with something if you want as well.

Can't use the video if it was illegally obtained or recorded. Any evidence after that is out as well thanks to the Fruit of poisonous tree doctrine and it's "tainted"

Though I believe it should be admitted, I don't make the rules

The question is not if using information gained from torture is ethical, it's if what you're doing with said information ethical.
---

I know its illegal. I was literally bitching about the fact its not.

Oh, did you know that you cant use a video that was illegally recorded? But I think you should.

Lastly, itd be great if any evidence could be used to get the truth out there.

Raddest_Chad posted...

I know its illegal. I was literally bitching about the fact its not.

Oh, did you know that you cant use a video that was illegally recorded? But I think you should.

Lastly, itd be great if any evidence could be used to get the truth out there.

One way people have gotten information illegally and it was still accepted was the good faith exception.

I don't think there is ever any reason to reject knowledge no matter how it was gained. There are a lot of horrible ways to learn, and the learning doesn't make what happened okay, but the knowledge remains. As it should.
---

CTLM posted...

Germans did some awful experiments in WW II. They learned a lot, such as ways to deal with burns, effects of lack of water/ only drinking salt water, and poisons. We can't change the past, but can use it to further our own knowledge.

Our country has used different types of torture to get information from captives, as has every country in history. That info has or helped us during wartime. Use it if you got it

Ive read that Japanese researchers from groups like Unit 731 avoided post-war prosecution in exchange for their research.

Cacciato posted...

CTLM posted...

Germans did some awful experiments in WW II. They learned a lot, such as ways to deal with burns, effects of lack of water/ only drinking salt water, and poisons. We can't change the past, but can use it to further our own knowledge.

Our country has used different types of torture to get information from captives, as has every country in history. That info has or helped us during wartime. Use it if you got it

Ive read that Japanese researchers from groups like Unit 731 avoided post-war prosecution in exchange for their research.

We got the better part of the CIA, NASA, and our nuclear program from Project Paperclip.

Any Nazi scientist we didn't manage to get our hands on, the Soviets got to first.
---

Lokarin posted...

Rules:

-Torture is ethically wrong in this context

-Someone tortured anyway and gained information

...

Is it ethical to use that information?

Hypothetical example: German scientists Mengele/Heim did absolutely horrid experiments during WW2, but suppose their torturous experimentation found a cure for cancer/malaria/whatever

Is it ethical to use such cure?

On the one hand, you don't want to validate torture - but on the other hand, what's done is done why waste what you've gained?

Sure, it is ethically right to use the information. Now, is the information accurate? That's a bigger issue, since torture will often result in people just saying whatever in order to get you to stop torturing.

But if the torture is already done, and the information is already given, if you ask me, it would be unethical to NOT use the information. I mean really, you're just going to torture someone and then not act on any information? That's exceptionally cruel.
---

everything is fine if you win in the end
---

It depends on if the information is credible. One argument against torture is that the subject will say anything to make it stop whether it's true or not. It just needs to sound like what the torturer wants to hear.

Assuming the information is credible, and would save lives; it would be unethical to let people die when you have the means to prevent it.
---

We cant use this intel, it's not organic!
---

DirtBasedSoap posted...

Doctor Foxx posted...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/06/do-doctors-use-nazi-data-in-their-research.html

CTLM posted...

Germans did some awful experiments in WW II. They learned a lot, such as ways to deal with burns, effects of lack of water/ only drinking salt water, and poisons. We can't change the past, but can use it to further our own knowledge.

This is by and large untrue

this isnt proof by any means but do you really think medical institutions would come out and go yep, we use things nazis discovered in procedures!

Well, it's Slate, it shouldn't be used as evidence for anything. In fact, Slate is so bad I wouldn't risk clicking the link to even check their information which, generally speaking, is crap anyway. Any legitimate insights that might be in there are better learned from more reliable sources.

Otherwise, afaik, using the findings of Nazi medical research is inherently a hot-button issue especially because it can be seen as lessening the perceived evil of Nazis (much like the effect of people just tossing that word around as an insult does) by suggesting that some good came from their efforts, which is another entire ethical level on something that already has some questionable ethics. The issue is generally so fraught that anything that might use it generally acknowledges the many problems associated with using it.

https://www.statnews.com/2019/05/30/surgical-dilemma-only-nazi-medical-text-could-resolve/

Mr Hangman posted...

Certainly using it in any kind of courtroom would be absolutely out of a question.

Something like that is already specifically forbidden, just like any other illegally procured information (although the workaround is, once they have illegally-obtained knowledge, to establish another way of knowing that information so it potentially has the same end effect and once you know something it's easier to backtrack to "find" it another way)
---

It would be kinda wasteful not to. Not to mention kinda disrespectful to the victim of the torture. You go to all the trouble of pulling out nails and don't have the decency to act on it?

Any time you torture someone, you will eventually experience that torture yourself, therefore, it is ethical to use torture only if you will prevent more over all suffering then you cause.

Now if someone ELSE already tortured someone and gained information from the process, then it is not only ethical to use it, but imperative that you do so to reduce suffering as much as possible to balance out the suffering caused getting said information.

So yes, it's ethical.
---

Let's not defend this

https://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/17/us/nazi-data-on-hypothermia-termed-unscientific.html

A continuing debate over using Nazi data on hypothermia is moot, a new analysis suggests, because the concentration camp experiments in which the data were obtained were scientifically unsound.
The report concludes that data from the experiments, in which prisoners were thrown into tanks of ice water, are worthless because the research relied on scientifically unsound methods, was carried out erratically and was largely fraudulent.
The analysis said the hypothermia experiments conducted at the Dachau concentration camp in Germany in 1942 and 1943 have ''all the ingredients of a scientific fraud, and rejection of the data on purely scientific grounds is inevitable.''

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199005173222006

Pretending erratically documented brutal war crimes were sound scientific experiments? Ones that we've learned from? That is insulting and factually incorrect

Pretending information coerced by torture is reliable is dangerous

I'm surprised at how quick these things are defended. Fuck

---

Mr Hangman posted...

Torture is wrong in every context.

If it's already happened, first, everyone involved, from the direct torturers all the way up the line to every supervisor who ordered or approved it should go to prison for a long, long time.

Any "information" obtained is almost certainly going to be garbage. It won't be accurate, correct, timely, or complete.

If there was any grain of truth to it, it would still be wrong to use it in many situations. Certainly using it in any kind of courtroom would be absolutely out of a question.

The only sliver of a chance is that there could be a lead that could be independently confirmed though other investigation afterword. But there is no plausible real world scenario in which torture is justified to obtain that.

This right here.
---

https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/20/4/207.full.pdf

Read this and really deeply consider your stance on these crimes against humanity

Jay Katz, a prominent biomedical ethicist, noted that '... it seems evident that the ethical problem of using data and benefiting from evil is moot, if they prove to be useless ...'

---

You guys get information from torture?
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

Let's not defend this

https://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/17/us/nazi-data-on-hypothermia-termed-unscientific.html

A continuing debate over using Nazi data on hypothermia is moot, a new analysis suggests, because the concentration camp experiments in which the data were obtained were scientifically unsound.
The report concludes that data from the experiments, in which prisoners were thrown into tanks of ice water, are worthless because the research relied on scientifically unsound methods, was carried out erratically and was largely fraudulent.
The analysis said the hypothermia experiments conducted at the Dachau concentration camp in Germany in 1942 and 1943 have ''all the ingredients of a scientific fraud, and rejection of the data on purely scientific grounds is inevitable.''

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199005173222006

Pretending erratically documented brutal war crimes were sound scientific experiments? Ones that we've learned from? That is insulting and factually incorrect

Pretending information coerced by torture is reliable is dangerous

I'm surprised at how quick these things are defended. Fuck

Of course they weren't truly scientific. No control group, subjects were forced into testing, etc. Never seen anyone defend their actions. Ever.

The results give people a basis to work with. No one is going to try to replicate the results, but now people have an estimation or idea what will happen when certain events take place.

People have known about poisons since B.C. times. They knew poisoning was fatal. Now people have more information as to what poison is fatal at what amounts and effects on the body if it wasn't.

The studies on hypothermia and altitude were the "best" and closest to actually being scientific. The altitude study is the "gold standard" to this day while the cold studies provided (for the most part) reliable data.

CTLM posted...

Of course they weren't truly scientific. No control group, subjects were forced into testing, etc. Never seen anyone defend their actions. Ever.

The results give people a basis to work with. No one is going to try to replicate the results, but now people have an estimation or idea what will happen when certain events take place.

People have known about poisons since B.C. times. They knew poisoning was fatal. Now people have more information as to what poison is fatal at what amounts and effects on the body if it wasn't.

The studies on hypothermia and altitude were the "best" and closest to actually being scientific. The altitude study is the "gold standard" to this day while the cold studies provided (for the most part) reliable data.

What?

Please read more about it

This review of the Dachau hypothermia experiments reveals critical shortcomings in scientific content and credibility. The project was conducted without an orderly experimental protocol, with inadequate methods and an erratic execution. The report is riddled with inconsistencies. There is also evidence of data falsification and suggestions of fabrication. Many conclusions are not supported by the facts presented. The flawed science is compounded by evidence that the director of the project showed a consistent pattern of dishonesty and deception in his professional as well as his personal life, thereby stripping the study of the last vestige of credibility. On analysis, the Dachau hypothermia study has all the ingredients of a scientific fraud, and rejection of the data on purely scientific grounds is inevitable. They cannot advance science or save human lives.
In the light of these findings, attempts to use the data from the Dachau experiments have been puzzling. The persistence of the claim that the work offers usable or valuable information is difficult to understand. One probable reason is the extremely limited availability of the Alexander report and the tendency of investigators to use secondary citations without consulting the primary source. Wider circulation of the Alexander report would thoroughly expose the true nature of the work and put an end to the myth of good science at Dachau. Future citations are inappropriate on scientific grounds.
Inferior science does not generally come to the attention of the ethicist because it is usually discarded by scientists. Ethical dialogues deal with work of sound scientific but controversial moral content, and the mere fact that a debate is conducted implies that the subject under consideration has scientific merit. If the shortcomings of the Dachau hypothermia study had been fully appreciated, the ethical dialogue probably would never have begun. Continuing it runs the risk of implying that these grotesque Nazi medical exercises yielded results worthy of consideration and possibly of benefit to humanity. The present analysis clearly shows that nothing could be further from the truth. Although the Dachau experiments opened the dialogue about an important ethical issue, the discontinuation of debate about these experiments should not bring an end to exploration of the larger subject the implications of the use of ethically tainted data. But the Dachau study is an inappropriate example for that purpose.

---

If you can verify it as true, then it doesn't matter.
---

Yes. I mean if get info on something major about to happen you arent gonna go "well we tortured the guy for the info so we should just pretend we dont know about it"
---

If you don't use the info then you basically just tortured someone for kicks. That seems worse to me. Not that I condone torture for any reason whatsover.
---

PMarth2002 posted...

someone for kicks

That's not really what I meant.

Like if you have a soldier torture someone and they gain valuable information... are you ethically barred from using that information? (Said soldier will be court martial'd regardless)
---

Lokarin posted...

PMarth2002 posted...

someone for kicks

That's not really what I meant.

Like if you have a soldier torture someone and they gain valuable information... are you ethically barred from using that information? (Said soldier will be court martial'd regardless)

If the info would save lives I think it would be unethical to not use it.
---

What if you're torturing a child killer to find out where they hid the bodies cause even though they're already been proven guilty they just doesn't want to to say where but the parents or whoever wants closure hmmm?
---