PH100 Lecture Notes

First point the perpetrators at abu ghraib

Info iconThis preview shows pages 35–37. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: First point: The perpetrators at Abu Ghraib “genuinely did not think that they were doing wrong” (47) • Doris and Murphy's justification: otherwise they wouldn't have posed and Second point: The definition of torture was narrowed: all kinds of abuses would thus not count as torture • “[c]ertain acts way be cruel, inhuman, or degrading, but still not produce pain and suffering of the requisite intensity to fall within proscription against torture” Conclusion: It is likely that perpetrators at Abu Ghraib did not think that their acts were manifestly illegal. Responding to Atrocity What are the practical consequences of their position? How should we respond to atrocities? If perpetrators of wartime atrocities typically occupy excusing conditions, should they then be exculpated? • Doris and Murphy: No. Excuses do not always entail exculpation • moral responsibility should be separated from criminal liability Consequences of their position: • they must accept a doctrine of “strict liability” which entails a rejection of a mens rea (guilty mind/criminal intent) requirement for criminal liability • the doctrine of strict liability has implications for those higher up in the chain of command: if individuals in combat occupy excusing conditions, then “whatever individual responsibility obtains resides with those who knowingly order them into such conditions” (52). December 4, 2012: The Ethics of Implicit Bias Focus: thinking about race • how we think about race • how we conceptualize race and racial membership • how we evaluate race and racial membership • what are the effects of how we think about race on our behavior Structure A. Summary of empirical work on racial cognition B. Discussion of the normative nature of these implicit biases • Are implicit biases inherently bad/immoral? • Is it morally problematic to harbor or have implicit biases? • How can we counter the effects of implicit biases? Implicit Racial Bias Two “real world” studies: • Study #1: Design two types of resumes ◦ p. 523 ◦ results: ▪ White names received 50% more callbacks for interviews than their Black counterparts ▪ White-names resumes with highly qualified credentials received 30% more callbacks than their less qualified White counterparts ▪ but: there wasn't the same type of differentiations between highly qualified Black resumes and their less qualified Black counterparts • Study #2: NBA and refereeing practices ◦ p. 523 Implicit Association Test (IAT) • IAT has been used to show that many subjects display subtle signs of racial bias in controlled experimental settings – even if those subjects explicitly disavow any form of racial prejudice • Is there a time difference in accuracy and speed in the performance of task #1 vs. that of task #2? • p. 525-6 Significance of IAT results 1. Performance on IAT is predictive of many types of behavior and judgment....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page35 / 40

First point The perpetrators at Abu Ghraib “genuinely did...

This preview shows document pages 35 - 37. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online