Surname 1

Name
Professor
Course
Date
When Illegal Acts Should Be Permissible
Aristotle three forms of persuasion methods that appeal to peoples conscious include
ethos, pathos, and logos. Ethos looks to persuade someone by offering them a persons character.
Here, a person seeks to accomplish what they want by convincing their audience that they have
the credibility necessary to provide an opinion on their chosen subject. Pathos, on the other hand,
is a persuading process that appeals to an individuals emotion. Often, it is used to illicit
empathy, fury, or even understanding for the course of actions or decisions that someone
undertakes. Logos depends solely on logic. It is the use of evidence and purpose such as
historical events, research materials amongst other things, to influence the listeners. The three
forms of persuasion are evidently employed by the two authors to give credence to each of the
author's views and reasons for their stance in the matters they are writing on. The use of torture
and mercy killings have been the subject of debate through the years. While each the issues they
are talking about are controversial, they each adopt a stance based on their conviction.
Michael Levins, The Case of Torture advances the idea that torture is permissible in
certain situations such as terrorism. Levin uses logos by stating that when he makes a note of the
fact that if a terrorist is not forthcoming with information about a bomb that they planted, and the
device will likely result in the death of millions of people, then torture should be permissible.
Following due process or constitutional stipulations when the bomb is set to go off within a short
period, he observes, will most likely cause the death of millions of innocent civilians. Hence,

Surname 2
Levin points out that torture should be permissible in such a situation, to avoid mass casualties.
While he does admit that torture may be permissible depending on the circumstances, he insists
on the act being carried out only when innocent lives are at stake, and not for confessions or
retribution (Wisnewski 63). Pathos also comes to play in Levins article. The emotional appeal is
found where Levin asks four mothers if they would allow torture to a terrorist that kidnaps their
newborn child., The author notes that all parents agreed that torture is a measure that they would
consider. Levin uses the highly emotional example to appeal to his readership on the necessity
for torture. To lose ones child often tends to provoke anger, desperation, and despair, a state of
affairs that will lead to the mother wanting her infant back through any means necessary. Levins
use of the emotional appeal serves to bring torture into the discussion as a possible intervention
given the circumstances. Further, he also seeks to bring the terrorists credibility into question by
asking why a person that would endanger the lives of millions of individuals for convictions that
are probably not justified deserves consideration. From this, it can be surmised that certain
situations call for the interest of one person being sacrifice for the greater good (Mirko and
Clarke 48). As such, it is clear that there are situations where torture should be considered as a
necessity in our society.
Despite the fact that Barbara Huttmans credibility questioned by the audience of a show,
she goes ahead and gives a vivid picture of the situation that leads to her decision to end her
patients life. Her duties as a nurse establish the pathos of her argument, as it is indeed feasible
that she experienced firsthand the cost that comes with prolonging the lives of terminal patients
in the discharge of her duties. Huttman was in a position that privileged her with seeing the
transformation of the patient from a healthy and jovial person into a shell of his former self.
Since she was close to the patients family and was aware of their daily struggles and despair in

Surname 3
the matter, it should come as no surprise that she made the decision, however difficult it must
seem. Huttman was able to empathize with her patients resolve to end his never ending suffering
once and for all. The logos angle in the article emerges where the nurse tries to justify that there
was clearly one inevitable end, and to elongate her patients struggle and pain just because she
could or felt obligated to, was wrong (Lewy 45). It is a fact that the patient suffered from a
terminal condition that would eventually end his life. Even more disconcerting, the pain
medication no longer served its purpose, and the disease had taken its toll not only on the patient
but also on his family and caregivers. The logos and pathos in the appeal are also apparent if we
consider the responsibilities that the author had as a nurse. While it is true that medical
caregivers are tasked with the responsibility of nursing patients back to health, they are also
charged with the role of bringing ease to the pain and an end to the suffering and discomfort of
their patients (Lewy 46). In cases where a patient is undergoing a lot of physical and emotional
pain due to their diseases, Huttman posits that a dignified death should be considered especially
when a terminally-ill patient asks for one. From her argument, it is wrong for medical science to
elongate the suffering and despair of patients, not because it is a necessity or it serves another
higher purpose, but simply because it can.
Although each of the two articles has adamant convictions, and one cannot easily
separate one from the other in regards to their sensitivity and impact on the society, Levins
article is more convincing to me. Terrorists have been a major issue in the world, especially in
recent years. Levin weaves the three forms of persuasion into his article to demonstrate the
tragedy in allowing a group of people to put the lives of their fellow man in their hands for
misconstrued ideals. and kill innocent people, simply because they are unsatisfied with the way
their lives turned out or are pushing an unconvincing agenda. Even more disturbing, these

Surname 4
individuals feel no remorse or guilt for their actions, boasting of their acts through media outlets.
As Levin points out, while it is indeed true that we all have rights, acts of terror constitute a
denial of the rights of the larger populace to live our lives free of fear (Wisnewski 23). Levin
argues, and I agree, that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to grant a person who makes a
mockery of the whole establishment of human rights the same privileges that they would so
easily thwart. If the lives of hundreds of individuals are at stake, and the person putting those
lives at risk is not forthcoming with the necessary information, torture should be a means to an
end (Bagaric and Clarke 85). By waiving the right that his or her fellow human beings have to
live, then they too have lost their right to constitutional protection by evidently going against the
stipulates of the Constitution. And even while our society is far from perfect, resorting to
violence to seek attention or make a point is not an option. Thus, while I firmly believe that
individual rights are important, I concur with Levin when he says that torture may be permissible
given the situation especially when it serves to prevent mass casualties.
In conclusion, both articles look at situations where legal, and to a certain extent, moral
obligations may be overlooked depending on the circumstances. Both Levin and Huttman give
compelling arguments in support of torture and mercy killings respectively. What sets their
arguments apart is what methods the authors apply and how well they do so. While both the
authors make use of the different forms of persuasion, Levins article was the most appealing for
its use of ethos, pathos, and logos. Mercy killing and torture are by most accounts heinous acts
that should not be preserved even for the basest in society. Still, Levins argument makes more
sense since he advances that the rights of the populace should be put first, or the greater good.

Surname 5
Work Cited
Bagaric, Mirko and Julie Clarke. Torture. Albany: the State University of New York Press, 2007.
Print.
Lewy, Guenter. Assisted Death In Europe And America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Print
Wisnewski, J. Jeremy. Torture, Terrorism, And The Use Of Violence, Vol. II. Newcastle upon
Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Pub., 2008. Print.