Hurts So Good (Post 6)

So, is it really acceptable to torture when it is to the benefit of numerous individuals? This brings to mind a certain adage that goes, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." I believe that this sums it up quite nicely. This is to say that, when it's the stubbornness of one ill-meaning individual versus the fate of numerous innocents, the choice is pretty obvious. There are certain times when one instance of morality will overpower another. Pain is fixable, however death is unfortunately not, and in this right, it would be less moral to let many innocent people die when an individual could be forced to prevent it. Simultaneously, they would only be subjected to pain, which they would get over eventually and, would most likely not cause lasting effects. Even if it did, It would be easier to do than bring someone back to life (which is, obviously, impossible). Honestly, i would think it would be against one's morals to not do what was beneficial to the masses, mainly because they were not at fault, and did nothing to deserve a death or other misfortune. however, the person being tortured would be at fault and would have some form of punishment inflicted upon them anyways.