- Location
- Right Where I Am
I could see the right author writing a comedy where Jack gets called out on being a torture amateur.
Pet Peeves in Fanfiction
- Thread starter LostHourglass
- Start date
The Narrator
Disembodied Voice
- Location
- Somewhere Offscreen
Ironically, the only Robin that's true of is Stephanie, the one that Batman kept trying to force to quit.
Kadmus
Dragon's teeth are surprisingly hard to sow
- Location
- Devon
- Pronouns
- He/Him
The Naruto-verse's argument against torture isn't 'it's unethical', it's 'it's a terror weapon, not an investigative tool. use your fucking literal mind readers and your magic illusion-weavers to get information, you idiot.' Unless you're having literally Naruto show up, because he would oppose torture categorically.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Okay, but people that are ethically opposed do exist, you literally just listed one. They're the exception, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. As said you would need a good rationale and characterization to justify it, but on its face it's certainly not impossible.
Kadmus
Dragon's teeth are surprisingly hard to sow
- Location
- Devon
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Yeah, you can definitely have characters who would be ethically opposed! A lot of them would be prominent named characters from the series, even; it's just that you have to aknowledge that they're a little unusual in the context of their setting. Sorry if it came across as my disagreeing with you.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Oh yeah, no big. I probably just misread what you were saying ^^;
I suppose the thing there would be whether the "mind-shattering agony" is the intended result, or an unfortunate side-effect.
A spell whose sole purpose is mind-shattering agony is, of course, just another method of torture. It's like saying "don't torture them with burning metal brands, you should water-board them instead!". However, if you have a mind-reading or lie-detecting spell that is 100% reliable, but also causes mind-shattering agony… then you're only going to use it under circumstances where other people might resort to torture. It's a torturous spell, but it's not a torture spell.
Because, as you said: there's no moral quandary around torture, because it doesn't work. But, if you had a method that did work, then you've shifted away from "completely inexcusable and morally reprehensible" to "possibly sometimes excusable, but where does that line fall?", which opens up the possibility for the story or characters to include that debate.
- Location
- Volksstaat Hessen, Deutsches Reich
Well that requires that you can in fact test the answers. And sure, you absolutely can create scenarios where that is the case! But it will always just be a small subset, I think. You couldn't do it with military secrets or corporate espionage or countless other things.
Also, in a funny way, it runs into the classical apologia for torture. "But there is a ticking time bomb!" Yeah well, if that's the case you probably don't have the time for 10 different tests...
MiskWisk
Hoot
- Location
- Somewhere devoid of wit
- Pronouns
- He
Point of order, the mind readers are exclusive to Konoha, and even then Konoha still has Ibiki as head of the torture and interrogation force. Torture is absolutely still used. Ibiki has been a victim of it, and at the very least uses psychological games as well as a ninjutsu style based around torture himself.
The use of genjutsu for torture is seen in the Iwa nin who capture Rin, so they do use the magic illusion weavers.
Ophelia
unpleasant
Please please please please please don't use descriptions of a person instead of their name or pronouns.
Examples:
"Superman was tired. The last son of Krypton sat down."
"Hermione shook her head. The bushy haired genius couldn't believe her friends weren't taking their studies seriously."
I see this less these days, as it seems to be a byproduct of learning to write from fanfiction circa 2005, but it still irks me. I don't care if the fic is made of chocolate, and that I'll win $100,000 if I finish it. If it has this in it, I'm out.
Examples:
"Superman was tired. The last son of Krypton sat down."
"Hermione shook her head. The bushy haired genius couldn't believe her friends weren't taking their studies seriously."
I see this less these days, as it seems to be a byproduct of learning to write from fanfiction circa 2005, but it still irks me. I don't care if the fic is made of chocolate, and that I'll win $100,000 if I finish it. If it has this in it, I'm out.
Axslashel
I am a pessimist not a realist.
- Location
- Land of the Midnight Sun
How lucky you are that the given names were used first so you could figure out who it was. It is even worse when someone is introduced as "the blonde" and you don't know who out of half a dozen characters it could refer to.
Last edited:
And then it's an AU where they've changed MCs looks so now Naruto is suddenly "the redhead."
That depends on what the answer is. Axslashel already gave the example of passwords. You're not going to get anywhere guessing passwords on your own "because you can always check them".
Also, you forget the tactic of asking a lot of questions you know the answers to and throwing in a couple that you don't. The person being tortured won't know which questions are the ones you know, so after being tortured a few times he'll answer all of them, and you'll get the answer to the ones you don't know.
Last edited:
- Location
- Somewhere
If you have the time for deceptive tactics, you have the time to trick the answers out of him without torture. And if it really is super time sensitive, he knows that he wins by just holding out long enough. Again, there's reasons why no one really uses torture for information in the real world. They only do it for (false) confessions and for sheer sadism.
Also, what if you're wrong and he doesn't know?
- Location
- Finland
I hate the "well but what if it works this once" argument about torture.
But in one way it kinda reveals the problem with the "well it might work but it does not mean the work endorses it" argument about lot of pretty shitty things that appear in fiction as solutions.
Because if it does work in the narrative, instead of failing, being unnecessary, or outright counterproductive, then the story kinda does argue in its favour.
But in one way it kinda reveals the problem with the "well it might work but it does not mean the work endorses it" argument about lot of pretty shitty things that appear in fiction as solutions.
Because if it does work in the narrative, instead of failing, being unnecessary, or outright counterproductive, then the story kinda does argue in its favour.
Axslashel
I am a pessimist not a realist.
- Location
- Land of the Midnight Sun
I still don't see how coercion by threat of violence does not have cases where it has been effective for the one doing it.
"Give me your wealth or I kill you" seems to me like a threat that has been quite credible throughout history. Sure it is the threat of violence that does it but a threat your victim does not believe you will do is useless.
Sure, but that's not torture.
Axslashel
I am a pessimist not a realist.
- Location
- Land of the Midnight Sun
It is the threat of pain to get something of value out of someone. How is that not threat of torture?
- Location
- Volksstaat Hessen, Deutsches Reich
...no? Ethical is not the same as effective. The two things are completely orthogonal to each other. In fact, nobody does evil for the sake of doing evil like a Saturday morning cartoon villain. They all do it because they think they get something out of it, and most of the time they actually do. If you act unfettered, you have a competitive advantage, after all.
But that doesn't make it less unethical.
I guess if you count "feeling powerful" as getting something out of it, sure.
- Location
- Finland
You are missing my point.
There's a reason i pointed out "unnecessary", because if the narrative does not accept alternative solutions that would not have been unethical, it is effectively putting it into "necessary evil" category (unless it was explicit villains doing it).
If a story decides to depict things like torture (or police brutality) as effective (without going in depth into the broader societal costs) methods, then it is giving a thumbs up to them as potential tools to use.
edit-
Basicly it's the "kill all the poor" sketch, but without "it would not work and you are monster for asking".
Last edited:
The Narrator
Disembodied Voice
- Location
- Somewhere Offscreen
There are people out there who absolutely do do evil things for no practical reason besides that they enjoy cruelty. Like, quite a few of them throughout history, and very famously a bunch of them in your country about 80 years ago.
- Location
- Omniverse #1345
Also the ticking time bomb gives the person being tortured something solid to hold out to. The thing with torture is eventually you just want it to stop... But if the person knows they need to hold out only 12 hours... It's much, much easier psychologically.
This is actually the scenario where torture is probably the least likely to work, because humans can hold out shockingly well when they believe they Win after a certain amount of time.
But just, as a general rule... all the justifications people are trying for how you can totally make torture work? They don't work. It doesn't work. Humans don't work that way. Yes, cause people enough pain they will say anything, eventually. ...But I mean it when I say anything. Anything is not accurate, useful information.
Last edited:
this is super funny you say it's a 2005 thing because the Iliad does that CONSTANTLY. It is a very, very, very old thing XD