(urth) Torturers?

[James Wynn]

On 8/4/2010 7:25 PM, Jack Smith wrote:
> Yeah.  Torture is a good way to gain confessions, but not necessarily 
> a way of getting the truth.  If you waterboard me, I'll confess to the 
> Lincoln assassination to make you stop.

Well, if a "confession" is all that is sought, then, yeah, torture isn't 
useful for ascertaining the truth. But if the goal is information, and 
the subject _has_ that information, then I suppose torture would work 
just fine. I mean, if one would confess to the Lincoln assassination 
under duress, I suppose he might also give up his _actual_ 
co-conspirators and their future plans.

It would be easy enough to learn whether the subject is making things up 
just to make you stop.

On 8/4/2010 6:57 PM, Dave Lebling wrote:
> It is specifically stated that torture in the Commonwealth is a 
> punishment, not a means of obtaining truth. The Guild performs exactly 
> the tortures ordered, and the torturers are taught to completely 
> ignore anything their victims say. Severian is chided for listening to 
> a victim at one point during his apprenticeship. 

I presumed it was only apprentices who were taught to ignore victims 
words. Master tortures are those assigned to seeking truth.

u+16b9