The article attempts to reconstruct the analytical debates on the morality of torture. The tragic events of September 11, 2001 served as a pretext for renewing the discussion. Professor of law Alan Dershowitz initiated debates on the justification of torture in extraordinary circumstances. Dershowitz’s argument consists of several key propositions: a) we must acknowledge the widespread use of torture; b) we should bring torture into the realm of law. Dershowitz’s idea has met both support and criticism from various professional humanitarians. (...) Despite the tremendous amount of criticism, Dershowitz’s argumentation in many aspects still remains one of the few ways to engage in a substantive debate in favor of the use of torture. (shrink)

The article reconstructs a brief period of intensive debates on the legitimacy and justification of torture in the early 1970s to the mid-1980s. It is shown that the emergence of the discourse on the morality of torture was influenced by the following factors. Firstly, the formulation of the “dirty hands” dilemma, which in the analytical tradition became a crucial tool for analyzing the relationship between ends and means. Secondly, the establishment of a theoretical and applied field of philosophical research known (...) as the just war theory. Although it should be acknowledged that the transfer of heuristics from the just war theory as a means of argumentation in favor of torture proved to be a philosophical deadlock, it allowed for the exploration of possibilities and limitations of new theoretical developments in the field of moral philosophy, which is always a necessary stage for the reiteration of debates. (shrink)