Informant38

scattered thoughts:

Lots of rough and tough hombres out there, and some mujeres too, will express their revulsion toward certain acts of moral failure - depending on their ethical orientation and their places in the economic food chain, with a soupcon of life-experience thrown in.
"I would never do that."
End of story.
Therefore anyone who would do that is pariah, disposable, wrong, evil - whatever fits.
But that's the whole point of torture right?
Dude's all up on the get-the-infidels presence and intent and would never, ever, never give in or buckle, would never spill. Not ever.
Won't talk, can't be made to talk, won't, can't, won't...
Well yeah.
So then where is circumstance in that?
Can the random hits of upbringing and environment collapse the will?
Can circumstance conspire to break a human being - to "make them talk" or otherwise violate their own moral code?
When is poverty synonymous with waterboarding? Ever?
No? And aren't the voices of disagreement the same ones saying they would never do that? That it's not in them to do that?
What happens to the other aspects of will in those who've been broken to make them talk?
What happens then to the social and personal moralities that we all carry? Do they remain intact when someone's been broken in those chambers we've been seeing so graphically hinted at lately?
Is torture that precise?
Any research in the files? Think the Mengelians left any documentation on that? Think the neo-Mengelians have gathered any?
These questions will always lead back to the twilight horizon of the metaphysical and supernatural, because at some point in the discussion you'll have to commit to a view of "circumstance" that's either random, or a controlled display of will from a higher source - or from an other source, not necessarily higher but exercising more shaping control on our lives than most of us can get our minds around.
If it's random then your moral superiority evaporates, and you can't pull that "I would never" posture because you would - you just haven't been broken; if it's controlled from outside the observable system, if these situations and conditions are part of some larger design, then it would behove you to align yourself accordingly.
Either way the smug confidence of the statement has no validity - it's a product of shelter and privilege.