Be sure to share your comments in the Class Participation section below -- that's the best part! Also, you can use the arrows on your keyboard to flip through pages quickly.

Click below to buy the books, and a portion of the proceeds goes to
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital! Use this link to buy the books, and a portion of the proceeds goes to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
Join the conversation!
There are now 2 comments... what are your thoughts?
  1. Kevin says

    And that is reality smashing into philosophy isn’t it? I always wondered how our modern concepts of evidence and due process could square with the murk of modern crime without all of the technology we now use. (Think about it, no DNA, no cameras, not even fingerprints!) The simple answer is the two did not reconcile. Without interrogation one could do anything as long as there were no witnesses. With interrogation anyone could be made to confess to anything.

    I notice a link between the medieval torturer and the early cop. Neither is actually motivated to discern the truth. Both are motivated by an instruction to take the person in question and get them officially declared criminals so that the state can do what it wants to them (imprison, kill, or just separate them from support).

    • Just the early cops? Some of the later ones weren’t much better. Some were outright worse a la Bull Connor and Chicago 1968.

Leave a Reply to Robert Montrose Cancel reply