> what about a torturer extracting information about a bomb placed in a school? What about someone divining the information about the bomb from the entrails of

> what about a torturer extracting information about a bomb placed in a school? What about someone divining the information about the bomb from the entrails of puppies? Why prefer one horrendous and inexact method over another? ((though maybe if the information was actually inside one of the puppies they'd do it because it's "just a puppy", whose lives are arguably less valuable than schoolchildren)) What if the information is engraved on someone's pacemaker? What if you know that the information is maybe perhaps possibly wrong? If you think these scenarios are unlikely, FYI so is the "torturing to extract information about a bomb in a school" scenario. What if you take into account the person you proposed should be tortured, most probably hasn't been formally found guilty? What if you take into account that even if you think you're pretty sure, innocent people are sometimes found guilty (and even put to death)? What if you take into account that this course of action means that you are now living in a society where torture is considered legitimate in a police investigation? Meaning that it will be used more often, and therefore with growing certainty at some point applied to innocent people (just like happens in places that still support the death penalty). How big of a school does it need to be, for you, to justify that? Including the part where you take into account that you can't be sure whether you will obtain any correct information at all.