Tortur, Debat & Etik

Christine Thorup, Gustav Højmark-Jensen, Brandt Køppen, Laura Christiane, Marie Louise Svendsen & Nadia Ahmed

Studenteropgave: Semesterprojekt


This study sets out to analyse the contemporary torture debate in America in the years after 9/11. This dissertation will focus on portraying the media debate surrounding torture chronologically and will comment on the arising themes and tendencies throughout. In addition to these themes and the multitude of different angles, this dissertation will illustrate the numerous forms of modern interrogational torture and the complex definitions and euphemisms utilized for furthering various agendas and diverging objectives. Furthermore this study will address the ethical discussion, which inevitably shrouds the torture debate. The ethical examination will primarily be based upon contrasting deontological and utilitarian point of views depicted in the theories and arguments displayed by key characters in ethical and judicial discussion such as Alan M. Dershowitz, Bob Brecher, Uwe Steinhoff and Mirko Bagaric & Julie Clarke. Finally this study will reflect on the different justifications of and counter-arguments against interrogational torture.

UddannelserBasis - Humanistisk Bacheloruddannelse, (Bachelor uddannelse) Basis
Udgivelsesdato27 maj 2014
VejledereMichael Kjeldsen


  • Etik
  • Ticking Bomb Scenario
  • Deontologi
  • Mirko Bagaric & Julie Clarke
  • Uwe Steinhoff
  • Lovliggørelse
  • Utilitarisme
  • Torturdebatten i USA efter 9/11
  • Bob Brecher
  • Alan M. Dershowitz