Talk:Psychology of torture

Benefits of torture/benefits of overcoming torture
Does anyone else see this article as one long narrative about the benefits of torture ("it shatters deep down narcissistic fantasies of uniqueness, omnipotence, invulnerability, and impenetrability") followed by the benefits of overcoming torture?

I see this article as one long and for the most part sound study of the horrible detriments of torture, an overwhelming emphasis of victimhood forever, followed by a few statements (which I added) that show it is possible to overcome tortures detrimental effects. I can see how this might be seen as above and it definitely needs integration/balance. I also would suggest a distinction be made between essential, healthy, and normal development narcissism vs it's pathological forms so that no one mistakes torture as a 'benefit' to anyone here.

Anacapa 06:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The article may seem to show the benefits of the act, because it doesn't outright censure the act. This is an objective article, in an objective encyclopedia. We can't put "Torture is bad and wrong. It should never be done, ever," in here, or it'll just become a long opinion. Keldor

I think the term "narcissistic" is used to mean not much more than inward looking. Narcissistic as used here does not seem to have the notion of being highly pejorative nor being a major personality disorder. However, I do have to admit that there are far less ambiguous words which I personally would have chosen to use instead. --Viston 16:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree; it's a very poor choice of wording. I would consider removing any adjective there altogether, perhaps also chainging "fantasies" to "assumptions". This article has a lot of information about the detriments of torture, but it has to be rewritten to make this more evident.

SoCal's comments/Narcissism
By: Sam Vaknin (Submitted to Wikipedia by the original copyright holder)


 * I moved this byline from the third paragraph of the article and edited the article slightly to read as continuous prose. If it is on Wikipedia, it may be edited mercilessly, though Wiki editors might let most of this one might stand as it is because it is a well-written internally consistent article as it stands. But if it is on Wikipedia, the copyright is now a GNU public license, compliments of Sam Vaknin's generous donation. Thank you most sincerely, Sam, I only moved your byline here so others won't consider this article or any other article some sort of colony off-limits to further editing, so you won't be cited as sole author in the event others make edits, and to clarify that you generously donated your copyright to the public domain.
 * SoCal 20:43, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * It seems the article really says more about torture than it does about the mechanisms, etiology, diagnosis, treatment, implications and theories of psychological pain. Strictly speaking, this is a reasonably comprehensive and accurate essay on the Psychology of torture. The concept of psychological pain is an element of torture, but is not explained here as it is appreciated in developmental psychology or in various theories of personality. SoCal 20:58, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Now I understand. I browsed into this article from a link about psychological pain and the bolded first words are psychological pain but the article is titled psychology of torture and that is the title in the wiki link. I tripped over a style deviation, so I'll fix it. SoCal 22:49, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It appears that second paragraph got caught in an edit conflict. I'm not sure where Anome was going, I thought I was conflicting with my own edits. I don't know that it needs that graph to flow into the third - I just didn't want to accidentally drop it.SoCal 23:00, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Then I moved these links off of the page, because narcissism is scarcely the topic of the page. It's not that these are uninformative links, but it would be better of the content of an article explained how narcism relates to the psychology of torture, if that is what the links are to imply.SoCal 05:02, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Malignant Self Love
 * How to Recognize a Narcissist
 * HealthyPlace Narcissistic Personality Disorder Victims Community
 * Narcissistic Abuse Study List

title questions
Isn't the subject of this article really psychological torture, not the psychology of torture? Niteowlneils 01:34, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Isn't the subject of this article really "psychological effects of torture". What is the distinction between the infliction of physical vs psychological torture. What is the distinction between terror and torture since both seem to exist in a dialectical relationship. What would we call the "psychological effects of terror"? Few reputable sources exist that explain psychological torture(cause) versus psychological pain (effect) and how subjective and context-dependent each is.

I hope to see this title become the 'psychological effects of torture' similar to the 'effects of rape' in the rape article. There is a section on 'psychological torture' in the main torture article which is where I see psychological torture belongs. To me, what the psychologists call the 'psychology' (of anything) is confusing to non-psychologists. Is there a better way to title this fine gift that Sam gave WIKI so that everyone knows what is to follow? Anacapa 07:00, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

What on Earth
What on Earth does this bit mean?

There is no certain victim here.

''Last, but not least, torture induces associated psychological effects in those who inflict it. To torture can torture the torturer too. Diabolical torturers use subjects to torture subjects. This article studies the psychological effects associated with torture to the subject, not by the torturer or by the subject.''

While to torture probably can torture the torturer, most of this is very POV and/or nearly incomprehensible. Rōnin 03:29, 10 December 2005 (UTC)


 * (no certain victim) I added that to show that people choose how they cope with torture. There are no CERTAIN  victims because some people are able to overcome torture without becoming victims.  The original article is solid.  However, it ignores those few and amazing people who either overcome their torturer's tactics at incidence or who tranform themselves following torture.  To claim that ALL people who suffer torture are victims or victims forever is false.  Maybe there is a clearer way to state this.

(torture tortures the torturer) Former torturers have written about the ugly effects to them from torturing others. Obviously, anyone being tortured who is forced to torture others suffers severe effects too. Sorry about the 'tortured' language but that is the point I want to be shown here.

As to POV, I will be glad to source this as soon as I can. However, the basic point of view that I insist on here is that torture is a (diabolical) and dialectal dance between torturer and torturee that has effects to both sides. I don't want this article to become ALL about the effects of torture to the torturer but I do want to mention them, and to show that one especially diabolical torture tactic is to torture by forcing one to torture others. For example in WWII, the Japanese would force a POW to bury other wounded POW's alive at bayonet- point, which often induced terrible effects in the surviving POW.

Anacapa 06:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I found a little torture 'bible' Torture by Peters 1985. I suggest a glance at the effects to torturee/torturer and the human dignity side of this. Anacapa 04:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Well, I guess what I should have said was that the statement seemed a bit broad and categorical, because it isn't incomprehensible, really. I don't have any knowledge of this area though, so I'll leave you to it. :) Rōnin 01:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe some children buy the "this hurts me more than it hurts you" line, but we're talking about more than a swat on the bottom here, and the torturer is not a parent having to watch his child suffer. No doubt there is some graphic imagery that sticks in a torturer's mind, but graphic imagery sticks in the mind of paramedics and police officers and firemen too.  Perhaps they despise themselves, but they're not alone there either.  To liken their situation to that of the victim seems altogether unreasonable. 70.15.116.59 04:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Layout changes
I tried to to make distinctions between torturee/torturer here, state titles in non-psychological-profession language and clean up section titles. There is still much to do here. I see condensation and much additional material in the torturer sections. I also see cleaner titles and a cleaner main article title. Few people know what the 'psychology' of anything means unless they are psychologists. I suggest 'Psychological Aspects of Torture' or something like that instead. Please comment/suggest changes.Anacapa 04:08, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Section on cast of other characters associated with torture?
In addition to the tortured and the torturer there are often bystanders, whistleblowers, and others who participate in or who are associated with the torture (voluntarily or involuntarily). Torture has psychological effects on these people too. I suggest we add a section called 'Others' and study these roles there in much less depth. Please comment/suggest. Anacapa 04:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Causation
The article currently says: "Torture induces, but does not cause its associated effects. The subject's responses and reactions to torture (voluntary and involuntary) cause the associated pain, suffering and trauma in the subject." That statement needs to be changed. It may be true in terms of some kind of primitive definition of causation, e.g., turning on the gas stove causes the water to boil, but people who have thought carefully about causation have long ago figured out that causation is very frequently a confluence of many causes. If I stick your hand in boiling water and hold it in there, your hand will be burned and you will hurt. Nothing in either your voluntary or your involuntary responses can change the effects of having your hand boiled. If you are lucky you may find a medical hypnotist like Milton Erickson who will teach your brain how to turn off its response to the pain, but to perform that intervention is to oppose one cause with another. P0M 20:21, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The assertion quoted above is not backed up by either evidence or argument. Therefore I have deleted it. P0M 07:36, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I added that to show that torture is dependent on the subjects response not the torture itself. For example one man at GITMO being faced with sexual humiliations goes into paroxyms while another more worldly man just laughs at the female torturer.  The difference is inside the subject not in the torture itself.  Dr William Glasser with his cause and effect theory of human behavior explains this.  Lets discuss how to handle this here.Anacapa 07:09, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I concur ,re-edit this passage to include this mor eelaborated explenation. some physical fomrs of torture(liek cutting your palms off) Does happen regardless of the participant's tendecy to get hurt.-- Procrastinating@ talk2me 21:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the following paragraph because I thought it made no sense--as a piece of writing, the paragraph seemed to be a series of statements unrelated to one another or to the subhead (social effects), unclear, and of doubtful truth. It sounds like someone's opinion, not the result of any research, since conversion disorder is difficult to establish under the best of circumstances. (I just read a horrifying tale of a person who died of a fatal disease while in a psychiatric facility at Stanford. The diagnosis, conversion disorder, turned out to be wrong. But if the patient hadn't died, the doctors would never have known.)


 * "''But, more often, continued attempts to repress fearful memories result in psychosomatic illnesses (conversion). The subject wishes to forget the torture, to avoid re-experiencing the often life threatening abuse and to shield their human environment from the horrors. In conjunction with the subject's pervasive distrust, this is frequently interpreted as hypervigilance, or even paranoia. It seems that the subject can't win. Torture seems forever."

Eperotao 08:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC) ''


 * May I suggest you read The Trouble with Psychiatry an essay by (brave) pyschiatrist John Sorboro MD Skeptic 9/07. Psychiatry is merely witch doctor medicine today.  There is no sound science to back any of the 3000 plus 'disorders' in the DSM.


 * As for this paragraph, I agree the writing is terrible but there is wisdom in the paragraph that needs to be included somehow. As a torture victim,  I understand what the original author

who donated this content was trying to say here about repression and paranoia AND I know there are ways to transform what "seems forever". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.214.255.148 (talk) 05:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikified
Methinks that adding wikilinks brings this article more into line with wikipedia policy. It still needs organisation, some changes of tone and the removal of a few apparently-contradictory passages (these will probably disappear once the text is organised more logically. Well, got to go - many more articles to wikify!  Happy-melon 16:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Summary of minor edits

 * Physical torutree is not always brutal and hard to hide. A large part of it is intended to be nearly impossible to detect.
 * Removed paragraph:
 * "Since this article discusses the psychological effects associated with torture, it is also worthwhile to separate torture and its associated effects. Torture succeeds with some subjects and fails with others because people can choose responses to cope with it. Torture induces the most severe effects in those subjects least able to cope with it, and the least severe effects in those most able to cope with it."
 * (OR-ish, intended to be "positive thinking". But lacks clinical thoughtfulness or citation)

FT2 (Talk 00:43, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Move explanation of psych pain/stress higher up before it's referenced in detail.
 * Rename section heads to more accurately reflect section contents.
 * Move "overcoming" to own section
 * "Effect on torturer" intro is OR. replaced by direct lead in to following section, which summarizes why people torture, and then goes on to the effect on the torturer, avoidjng speculative editorial opinion. Also remove quote which poses a tangetial question but adds nothing to the section.

Please add a link to mobbing.ca
This article describes the psychological consequences of mobbing exactly. Mobbing is a form of psychological torture or terror which takes place in the workplace. You can find more information at http://mobbing.ca. The "Health Issues" page on mobbing.ca (http://members.shaw.ca/mobbing/mobbingCA/health-1.htm) describes the many mental, emotional and physical effects of psychological torture experienced by mobbing targets in the workplace.

For your convenience here is the link you can add to "External links":
 * mobbing.ca (Mobbing resources in Canada)

Radyx 00:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I do agree that "mobbing" (or group bullying) can be similar to psychological torture. Or mobbing may be used as one technque amongst many to psychologically abuse people (not all of whom are detainees). However a lot of mobbing is not necessarily like this and I would be cautious at overstating the similarity.

Incidentally there is a good UK site on bullying which includes some articles on "mobbing". For example see http://www.bullyonline.org/workbully/mobbing.htm.

Do actualy spend time and browse this site because there are hidden away are some real gem articles like http://www.bullyonline.org/workbully/serial.htm some of which have an eery resonance with the psychological effects of torture. --Viston 16:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'm well aware of Bully OnLine. I came across it years ago and have link to it on mobbing.ca. I was fortunate enough to have corresponded with it's creator Tim Field before he passed away Jan. 16, 2006 (I have a memorium to Tim on mobbing.ca as well). Mobbing is not only similar to psychological torture, it IS psychological torture - period. You said "a lot of mobbing is not necessarily like this". I don't quite understand what you mean as all mobbing is designed to torment the target psychologically. Physical attacks are rarely used as they bring consequences to the abuser. The psychological nature of mobbing is part of what makes it so difficult to prove. No one believes or understands the psychological torture the target has been subjected to. It is more than just an "eery resonance with the psychological effects of torture", it IS the psychological effects of torture - that's what makes mobbing so devastating. Mobbing = Psychological Torture and needs to be recognized as such. Please reconsider and add a link to mobbing.ca.
 * mobbing.ca (Mobbing resources in Canada)
 * Radyx 21:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

physiological pain = nociception = not in consciouness
the term "physiological pain" is actually a neurophysiological term and means nociception: the system which carries info about near-damage or damage to tissue to the spinal cord and brain. It is NOT in conscious awareness and so is not felt. A different way of talking about pain caused by physical injury needs to be found for this article cause this use is confusing. SmithBlue 02:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

"good" people torture?
There's an unsourced paragraph about how "good" people can torture under the right circumstances... sounds like a bunch of hooey to me. It seems much more plausible that the majority of people simply are evil, but without tight sourcing and clear definitions the whole thing is useless verbiage. 70.15.116.59 03:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You might change the language but I think the intent here is reasonable. One of the most famous psychological studies ever used 'normal' people to mock-torture others with electrical shocks.  The psychology of torture seems to include the psychological methods which can be used to induce 'normal' everyday people to torture.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.214.255.148 (talk) 04:45, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Resistance to torture
There's a blurb about overcoming psychological effects of torture, but I think this article needs information about how Special Forces types learn to resist torture, or other methods by which people have tried to resist or survive the process. 70.15.116.59 04:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree. This article is about the psychology of torture.  That includes the ways torturers use psychology as well as the ways which possible victims try to use psychology to become more immune from anticipated torture methods.  What can be torture to some 'victims' can be merely amusing to others...thanks to such factors72.214.255.148 (talk) 04:29, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Tried to clarify the title paragraph
As I read the article, I noticed that most of the content is about the overall psychology of torture so I changed the title to reflect that. The torture article already covers psychological torture. This article seems to be intended to cover the psychological dynamics that make torture of any kind possible rather than to duplicate content on psychological torture which belongs in the torture article.

I'll try to clean up the introduction to make this distinction clearer unless other editors come back with widely differing opinions on the intent of this article. Please discuss how you see this. 72.214.255.148 (talk) 05:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Tried to introduce the article
Please take a look at the introduction I edited. I pulled content on psychological torture over to the torture page to prevent confusion with the psychology of torture. Please comment or edit this first stab to make it clearer and cleaner. 72.214.255.148 (talk) 07:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Gutted
I've pretty much gutted the page. Huge swaths of the page were unsourced (removed per WP:PROVEIT) advanced a position (removed per WP:OR) or read like essays (ditto). I also removed a lot of low-value links per WP:EL. I'm sure there is a good page that could be written, but this wasn't it. Writing a page with "X person's FANTASTIC opinion about torture is ____" doesn't work. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 15:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Wrong Link
Link provided to "John Conroy" 1786-1854. It is not the same "John Conroy" who wrote "Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People," — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.27.19.216 (talk) 00:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Removed the link to the incorrect "John Conroy" Wikipedia page - and just left it as the name of a person quoted by the Washington Post reporter.Y-B Marmot 16:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devinemom (talk • contribs)

Restoration of old article contents
I'd like to make you aware of the fact that another user temporarily restored an older, considerably longer revision of this article (ca. revision 2009-01-08T16:17:41) as he found this revision more correct and informative than the current one (ca. revision 2012-11-14T16:21:06‎). See also: Discussion on his talk page: User talk:Permaculturedesigner. I reverted him since the contents were originally deleted because they did not met our quality standards and also to not trash other contributions. According to the edit history, the old article had various issues like usage of non-encyclopedic language, potential use of original research or unreliable sources, or a neutral point of view not being maintained. Nevertheless, there's a chance that some useful stuff was deleted alongside questionable content when the article was trimmed down years back. Since the article in the current form certainly lacks in various aspects as well, perhaps someone more familiar with this subject should re-evaluate the old revision and if useful material is found merge it back into the current article? Greetings. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 23:46, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Consider Deletion and Rewriting from Scratch.
Most of the article is uncited, large sections are misleading, irrelevant or feature a strong Anti-Psychiatry viewpoint. Which would be fine in moderation but it disgresses severely from the topic of the article. Past commentators have mentioned edit wars and reverts, so I'd like to propose it'll be best to start from scratch. Possibly renaming it to 'Psychological Effects of Torture' just to give it more focus and have a blueprint for what sections, and what sources could be used to expand upon it. The section on how Victims are affected reads like a personal opinion essay and only the last paragraph is on-topic. 86.155.67.172 (talk) 22:52, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Making New Edits
I have copied the introductory section to [my Sandbox] to begin providing some potential changes.Y-B Marmot 13:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devinemom (talk • contribs)

Revised Page is Ready for Review
I have revised the copied the entire page and provided suggested edits and additions within [my Sandbox]. Please take a look and let me know what suggested changes you recommend. Y-B Marmot 23:15, 10 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devinemom (talk • contribs)

Revised and new content was added when no feedback was provided regarding the draft version. Y-B Marmot 15:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devinemom (talk • contribs)

Can someone check for plagiarism?
A good section of this caught my eye as being nearly word-for-word what I'd just read in a different source. After a little backtracking I found an article from the National Library of Medicine. Note, for example, the line "One of the most marked differences is between individualist societies where realisation of personal goals often takes priority over the needs of kin and societal expectations, and collectivist societies in which the needs of family and prescribed roles take precedence over personal preferences" -- the Wiki's version here is somewhat reworded, but still noticeably close and not even cited.

Could someone compare the articles, figure out if parts should be quoted or reworded/rearranged, and properly cite the material? Kilyle (talk) 08:36, 16 December 2021 (UTC)