Interesting topic – challenging question.

Depending on your focus, different theoretical and methodological approaches could be suitable for carrying out research on torture.

Sociological and psychological literature on pain in sport might give you some inspiration, if your goal is to explore the feeling/body-related aspects.

The right not to be subjected to torture is associated with human dignity. The idea of dignity plays some role in this right’s interpretation, although the content of the idea in this context, as in others, is unclear. Making sense of the dignity idea involves several challenges. For a start, what is the satisfactory definition of dignity? Torture is part of the deliberate infliction of extreme suffering, and that torture is morally wrong by this defining feature. Note that even actions or practices that are inherently morally wrong might be morally justified in extreme circumstances. Human rights law needs the terminology provided by theorizations of dignity, but theorizations should be within traditional human rights laws.

Ontology examines the nature of something. In effect, this means that in the question you are posing, you are asking about the essence of torture. Generally, it is accepted that torture involves inflicting extreme pain. The question that arises here is one concerning torture's nature in terms of its essence, and thus the effort to answer this question is extraordinarily difficult since pain is not an absolute. Moreover, in contrast to the point made above, pain is not in itself a moral wrong, so this requires addressing the difference between kinds of pain (e.,g breaking your leg is painful. If this happened when you fell down the stairs, that isn't torture, and the pain being experienced isn't torture),

Epistemologically, torture presents a different set of issues. Here, you are trying to gain knowledge about torture, and the first step here is to define the kind o knowledge you want to obtain, and how that knowledge relates to torture or some aspect of torture. For example, you might want to measure torture, and here the problem is creating specific things that can be associated with torture and things that are not torture that can be measured. Here, if you were to decide to measure when the infliction of pain becomes torture, you would need to be able to have a scale, for instance, upon which people might agree that a certain form or amount of pain applied in a particular way becomes torture at a given point. This can be made difficult if, for example, one takes into account other dimensions of this problem, such as individual physical variability in perceptions of pain, or historical variations in perceptions of pain, or cross cultural variability in the perception (or definition) of pain and torture. This makes this a quite complex matter, and one that is difficult to present in the objective manner that epistemology is seeking to establish.

Es posible viajar en la comprensión de la tortura bajo un análisis ontológico y epistemológico a partir de tres aspectos : i) la noción de tortura se instituye en varios contenidos y sentido, desde los DIH es una noción que devela los tratos crueles e inhumamos y su tipificación como delito de lesa humanidad, en relación a los DDHH reconoce daños irreversibles a la dignidad e integridad física, psíquica y moral de la victima, bajo un análisis critico de la tortura, también se reconoce como una pedagogía de la crueldad de los actores armados, que daña y produce miedo, y que implica un control y deshumanización del cuerpo de la victima, pero, también una forma de silenciar y romper con las resistencias a la violencia, en ese sentido la ontología y la epistemología, abren la noción a múltiples sentidos: "Deconstruir la noción y dotarle de otras dimensiones ocultas" ii) los fines de los dispositivitos de tortura ¿Son solo para producir dolor o buscan otras estrategias de miedo, ruptura? la tortura daña el cuerpo de la víctima, pero, también, desmoraliza, inhibe, paraliza, produce miedo a los cercanos del afectado, rompe con certezas y principios de vida humana, con el fin de instalar la pedagogía de la crueldad, iii) la tortura es territorializada, es un acto ritual de crueldad para infundir temor y terror, con el fin de ganar control sobre los cuerpos y territorio (Rita Segato)

Buenos días..ontologicamente tienes que abordar tu tema sobre la naturaleza de la tortura, el modo de ser de ésta como fenómeno criminal y su aplicación en la realidad. Lo propio desde un punto de vista epistemológico. Busca autores desde la filosofía que te puedas apoyar.

It seems to me that in the case of torture, the ontology is interesting as a mechanism for changing the principles of the use of torture in social space. For example, does torture trigger protests or social movements; does torture affect social media and interactions; whether there is a correlation between attitudes towards torture on the part of certain social groups. And epistemology is how the attitude of the public has changed in historical retrospect towards torture in a specific society and in specific conditions. Here I mean how our understanding of what torture is, what are its features, what knowledge about torture has changed: at school, at the university, in a social group, in various social constructs and structures.

Tanto ontológicamente como especialmente desde la perspectiva epistemologica, la mejor doctrina que conozco -con aplicación real- es aquella surgida en las últimas décadas de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos y de la Corte Penal Internacional de Naciones Unidas (UN).

También la UN tiene una relatoría específica sobre tortura, de la que emergen permanentes casos e informes/país muy precisos.

A su vez, Argentina es uno de los países pioneros en juicios de lesa humanidad contra responsables de torturas y desapariciones de la última dictadura militar (1976-1982), desarrollando cientos de mega causas judiciales donde se ha profundizado el análisis de responsables directos e indirectos de la represión ilegal (incluye empresas y población civil y eclesiástica).

For an ontology of human rights, one can begin with the ontology of human beings. The latter leads one to the ontology of the human body, mind, etc., which can be argued to be the starting point for human rights. Right against torture, in specific, speaks for the protection of the human body and mind in different contexts (physical and mental torture in public and private settings). Also, most developments in torture law/s have been informed by the ontology of human beings (including aspects of their natural, social, political, economic, cultural, and global existence). ( for this kind of an approach, can also see Report of the Spl Rapporteur on Torture on Biopsychosocial factors conducive to torture and ill-treatment, 2020)

Relative to “human rights”, the Constructal paradigm in social systems:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356475384_THE_SCIENCE_OF_RIGHTS

Constructal paradigm:

https://constructal.wordpress.com/

The prerequisite to evolution (aka the constructal law) are dynamic channels of opposites. One may argue “torture” is the opposite of happiness; hence, evolution in civility.

Using knowledge given to a human through religious beliefs to suppress lower caste people. The government can use data to support their methods to protect people from abuses but in doing so actually cover up the real abusers and the laws or methods themselves become tools to continue abuse.