Case of Torture

Clarke 1

Clarke 1

Gina Clarke
Professor Zarlengo
Writing and Research
5 February 2013
Rhetorical Analysis Evaluating Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture” Torture is a concept that Americans attempt to avoid. If a criminal possesses the opportunity to harm innocent lives, the delinquent should be stopped. The idea presides in Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture”; Levin attempts to portray a point that the act of torturing terrorists in order to save innocent lives is justifiable. Throughout the article, Levin fabricates situations to present his argument that torture is not a bad idea. He voices that torture is not established to punish criminals, but instead it is established to hinder future malicious events from occurring. Although the United States government deems torture unconstitutional, Levin validates torture being acceptable through the utilization of the rhetorical appeals pathos and ethos.
Pathos, translated to “suffering” or “experience” in Greek, refers to the emotional content of a written work. Throughout “The Case for Torture”, Levin utilizes pathos in order to persuade readers emotionally that torture is tolerable. Levin states, “Americans would be angered to learn that Roosevelt could have had Hitler killed in 1943 – thereby shortening the war and saving millions of lives – but refused on moral grounds”(Levin 360). Pathos directly applies to this example due to the experience and suffering that people endured throughout Hitler’s reign. The passage states that if people were knowledgeable of the Roosevelt’s opportunity to slay the Fascist fiend, they would not be pleased of his peaceful approach.
Clarke 2
Clarke 2 Levin argues, “If life is so valuable that it must never be taken, the lives of the innocents must be saved even at the price of hurting the one who endangers them”(Levin 360). This passage from the essay attempts to instill Levin’s belief that torture is justifiable by the usage of pathos. No person wants to witness an innocent human suffer due to the villainous acts of a criminal; therefore, the idea of torturing wicked beings does not seem so evil. Levin applies his belief through examples such as, “Suppose a terrorist has hidden an atomic bomb on Manhattan Island which will detonate at noon on July 4 unless. Suppose, further, that he is caught at 10 a.m. of the fateful day, but – preferring death to failure – won’t disclose where the bomb is. What do we do”(Levin 359)? This example, exclaimed by Levin, instills a thought in the reader’s mind that maybe torture is not such an unacceptable action; maybe it could provide the government with the resource, if needed, to do what is necessary in order to protect faultless citizens. Levin claims it would simply be inhumane to state that torturing a criminal to prevent the casualties of innocent people was wrong. Ethos, in Greek means “character”, refers to the credibility or trustworthiness of an author. A main element of ethos is examining the tone of the author’s work. Levin’s tone throughout “The Case for Torture” is casual and assertive. Throughout the article, Levin writes in first person, and uses multiple rhetorical questions, establishing a casual relationship between him and the reader. Levin questions, “Torturing the terrorist is unconstitutional? Probably. But millions of lives surely outweigh constitutionality. Torture is barbaric? Mass murder is far more barbaric”(Levin 359). This example provides proof of Levin’s casual tone through his use of consistent questioning and referring to the reader as “you.” Syntax is located in this passage due to the different forms of sentence structure such as the interrogative sentences and the short responses. Throughout the article, Levin asserts his blatant beliefs that torture is reasonable and without torture, innocent lives will be lost. Throughout the entire article is Levin preaches his opinion on the concept. He consistently uses an assertive tone in order to instill his opinion in the readers mind.
Clarke 3
Clarke 3 Ethos also examines the author’s credibility in an essay. Levin’s credibility is questionable. Although the essay was published in Newsweek, it does not contain sufficient sources or credibility. In the essay, Levin provides results to an “informal poll” about a case regarding mothers approving or disapproving the torture of child kidnappers. Levin’s credibility with this example is weak due to the lack of the source to where he located the information on the poll. His credibility is also tainted due to the basis of the essay being strictly one sided, in favor of the usage of torture. If Levin had utilized both sides and established both beliefs about torture his essay would be deemed more credible. Instead the essay intends to persuade the reader instead of informing him or her about the subject.

Rhetorical appeals such as pathos and ethos preside in every literary work. In Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture,” both pathos and ethos are evident throughout. Although the article is slanted and therefore not as credible, Levin does provide a significantly strong opinion on the subject of torture being justifiable. Along with the death penalty and abortion, torture is an opinionative action that one is either for or against. If Levin presented both sides of the argument, one segment of the essay for torture, and the other against it, it would allow readers to establish his or her own opinion instead of only being subjected to Levin’s beliefs. With evil events such as September eleventh, 2001 that have occurred after this article was published, the American people today may agree with Clarke 4
Clarke 4
Levin’s opinion a little more due to the pain and suffering that occurred on that horrific day. Is torture a nefarious notion? Levin effectively establishes his beliefs that it is not.