What do you think?
Rate this book
Because It Is Wrong: Torture, Privacy and Presidential Power in the Age of Terror
Elevating the torture and privacy debate, this book brilliantly challenges the knee-jerk responses of those in media and government. Can torture ever be justified? When is eavesdropping acceptable? Should a kidnapper be waterboarded to reveal where his victim has been hidden? Ever since 9/11 there has been an intense debate about the government’s application of torture and the pervasive use of eavesdropping and data mining in order to thwart acts of terrorism. To create this seminal statement on torture and surveillance, Charles Fried and Gregory Fried have measured current controversies against the philosophies of Aristotle, Locke, Kant, and Machiavelli, and against the historic decisions, large and small, of Jefferson, Lincoln, and Pope Sixtus V, among many others. Because It Is Wrong not only discusses the behavior and justifications of Bush government officials but also examines more broadly what should be done when high officials have broken moral and legal norms in an attempt to protect us. This is a moral and philosophical meditation on some of the most urgent issues of our time. 6 black-and-white illustrations
- GenresPolitics
224 pages, Hardcover
First published September 1, 2010
6 people are currently reading
65 people want to read
About the author
Charles Fried
26 books13 followersCharles Fried is a prominent American jurist and lawyer. He served as United States Solicitor General from 1985 to 1989. He is currently a professor at Harvard Law School. He is sometimes described as a conservative, but his political views are perhaps better characterized as consonant with those of classical liberalism.
Born in Prague, Czechoslovakia in 1935, Fried became a United States citizen in 1948. After studying at the Lawrenceville School and receiving his Bachelor of Arts degree from Princeton University in 1956, he attended Oxford University, where he earned a Bachelor's and a Master's degree in Law in 1958 and 1960, respectively, and was awarded the Ordronnaux Prize in Law (1958). In 1960, Fried received the Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree from Columbia Law School, where he was a Stone Scholar.
Fried is admitted to the bars of the United States Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and numerous U.S. courts of appeals. He has served as counsel to a number of major law firms and clients, and in that capacity argued several major cases, perhaps the most important being Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical Co., both in the Supreme Court and in the Ninth Circuit on remand.
Fried's government service includes a year as Special Assistant to the Attorney General of the United States (1984-85) and a consulting relationship to that office (1983), as well as advisory roles with the Department of Transportation (1981-83) and President Ronald Reagan (1982). In October 1985, President Reagan appointed Fried as Solicitor General of the United States. Fried had previously served as Deputy Solicitor General and Acting Solicitor General. As Solicitor General, he represented the Reagan Administration before the Supreme Court in 25 cases. In 1989, when Reagan left office, Fried returned to Harvard Law School.
From September 1995 until June 1999, Fried served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, while teaching constitutional law at Harvard Law School as a Distinguished Lecturer. Prior to joining the court, Fried held the chair of Carter Professor of General Jurisprudence at Harvard Law School. On July 1, 1999, he returned to Harvard Law School as a fulltime member of the faculty and Beneficial Professor of Law. He has served on the Harvard Law School faculty since 1961, teaching courses on appellate advocacy, commercial law, constitutional law, contracts, criminal law, federal courts, labor law, torts, legal philosophy, and medical ethics.
Fried has published extensively. He is the author of seven books and over thirty journal articles, and his work has appeared in over a dozen collections. Unusually for a law professor without a graduate degree in philosophy, he has published significant work in moral and political theory only indirectly related to the law; Right and Wrong, for instance is an impressive general statement of a Kantian position in ethics with affinities with the work of Thomas Nagel, John Rawls, and Robert Nozick. Fried has been Orgain Lecturer at the University of Texas (1982), Tanner Lecturer on Human Values at Stanford University (1981), and Harris Lecturer on Medical Ethics at the Harvard Medical School (1974-75). He was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1971-72. Fried is a member of the National Academy of Sciences's Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Law Institute.
In September 2005, Fried testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in support of the nomination of John Roberts to become Chief Justice of the United States. After the nomination of Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court, Fried praised Alito as an outstanding judge but dismissed claims that Alito is radical, saying, "He is conservative, yes, but he is not radically conservative like Scalia." Fried testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in support of
Born in Prague, Czechoslovakia in 1935, Fried became a United States citizen in 1948. After studying at the Lawrenceville School and receiving his Bachelor of Arts degree from Princeton University in 1956, he attended Oxford University, where he earned a Bachelor's and a Master's degree in Law in 1958 and 1960, respectively, and was awarded the Ordronnaux Prize in Law (1958). In 1960, Fried received the Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree from Columbia Law School, where he was a Stone Scholar.
Fried is admitted to the bars of the United States Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and numerous U.S. courts of appeals. He has served as counsel to a number of major law firms and clients, and in that capacity argued several major cases, perhaps the most important being Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical Co., both in the Supreme Court and in the Ninth Circuit on remand.
Fried's government service includes a year as Special Assistant to the Attorney General of the United States (1984-85) and a consulting relationship to that office (1983), as well as advisory roles with the Department of Transportation (1981-83) and President Ronald Reagan (1982). In October 1985, President Reagan appointed Fried as Solicitor General of the United States. Fried had previously served as Deputy Solicitor General and Acting Solicitor General. As Solicitor General, he represented the Reagan Administration before the Supreme Court in 25 cases. In 1989, when Reagan left office, Fried returned to Harvard Law School.
From September 1995 until June 1999, Fried served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, while teaching constitutional law at Harvard Law School as a Distinguished Lecturer. Prior to joining the court, Fried held the chair of Carter Professor of General Jurisprudence at Harvard Law School. On July 1, 1999, he returned to Harvard Law School as a fulltime member of the faculty and Beneficial Professor of Law. He has served on the Harvard Law School faculty since 1961, teaching courses on appellate advocacy, commercial law, constitutional law, contracts, criminal law, federal courts, labor law, torts, legal philosophy, and medical ethics.
Fried has published extensively. He is the author of seven books and over thirty journal articles, and his work has appeared in over a dozen collections. Unusually for a law professor without a graduate degree in philosophy, he has published significant work in moral and political theory only indirectly related to the law; Right and Wrong, for instance is an impressive general statement of a Kantian position in ethics with affinities with the work of Thomas Nagel, John Rawls, and Robert Nozick. Fried has been Orgain Lecturer at the University of Texas (1982), Tanner Lecturer on Human Values at Stanford University (1981), and Harris Lecturer on Medical Ethics at the Harvard Medical School (1974-75). He was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1971-72. Fried is a member of the National Academy of Sciences's Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Law Institute.
In September 2005, Fried testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in support of the nomination of John Roberts to become Chief Justice of the United States. After the nomination of Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court, Fried praised Alito as an outstanding judge but dismissed claims that Alito is radical, saying, "He is conservative, yes, but he is not radically conservative like Scalia." Fried testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in support of
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
January 16, 2011
This father and son team wrote this book as a result of conversations they had after the
attack of September 11. Though they are both professors at universities, they tried to write
for non academic readers. They cited the Bible and
philosophers from Aristotle to Witgenstein and many others in between. I didn't get as much
from the book as I hoped because it was so scholarly and it has been a long time since
I took philosophy.
The title says it all and I didn't need to read the whole book to find that to be true.
I though that since it was short I could read it quickly (it is 169 pages) I found it difficult to trudge through.
September 20, 2010
An excellent discussion on torture, eavesdropping, and executive power. For the most part the arguments were easy to follow, as well as rational and well laid out. There were a handful of places that I personally had a difficult time following, but that didn't really make it difficult to follow the line of reasoning. I think this book would be important for anyone to read, especially United States citizens and politicians. I agree with the author's that torture is absolutely wrong in all cases.
March 20, 2013
Ugh, what an annoying book. If you believe torture is always wrong, then you have no need for this book. If the answer is not as clear cut in your mind, this book is still not worth reading. Their arguments are not persuasive and the authors - one, a former Reagan Solicitor General, the other, his son, a philosophy professor - seem to like to hear themselves talk (well, write) as they think through the issues. A wholly unsatisfying reading experience.
September 27, 2015
While this was written as a general book and thus lacks some of the density of an academic treatment, it still contains well-thought out and well-executed arguments about privacy and torture, the rule of law and the exception to the rule of law. Food for thought.
December 31, 2015
This book was good and I want to read it again.
November 18, 2011
Very thought-provoking. Balanced, reasoned approach to the subject.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews