When there is a serious question about the moral good, thoughtful and thorough m

When there is a serious question about the moral good, thoughtful and thorough moral analysis is required. The moral status of torture is a serious and thorny issue. Please refer to the included readings (David Sussman’s “What’s Wrong with Torture?” and Seumas Miller’s “Is Torture Ever Morally Justifiable?”) for two competing analyses of the moral status of torture. Your assignment is to carefully read each piece and write an analysis of the issue of torture. Write an essay that addresses the following issues, but write a whole, well-organized paper rather than simply a list of answers to the below. Be sure to include adequate support from the texts. Most especially, use what you have learned about moral theories in this course to inform your analysis. Questions: Do Miller and Sussman agree on the definition of torture to a great enough extent that they are talking about the same thing? (This is the sort of question that has to be asked first in any disagreement) How do Miller and Sussman differ on the relative moral wrongness of torture and killing (that is, is torture worse than killing, or is killing worse than torture?)? Why does this issue make an important difference for each account? What moral theory or theories does each make use of in order to make their case? For each writer describe one general problem with each of those moral theories and describe how that problem affects their account of torture. Which account is the better account? (more importantly) Why? (Hint: consider what makes one moral theory better or worse than another. Bonus Hint: Style or clarity has nothing to do with it. The moral status of torture does not depend on how well described an argument for it is or isn’t. If all you can say is that one theory “was explained better” or was “presented more clearly” or “had some examples with it”, then you aren’t focusing on what’s important.)