326

submitted 1 month ago by roadsidewildflower@midwest.social to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I doubled up a number a while back so now we skip forward lol

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Clear@lemmy.blahaj.zone 35 points 1 month ago

I happily live with myself. The death is on the hands of whomever tied those people to the tracks.

Yes, I pulled the lever and by so chose who lived and who died, but if I was that person alone on the tracks I wouldn't blame the one pulling the lever, I believe it was the lesser of two evil. I would still be fucking pissed, but at the one who tied me there, not the person forced to choose.

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 month ago

But would you push the fat man over the railing?

As before, a trolley is hurtling down a track towards five people. You are on a bridge under which it will pass, and you can stop it by putting something very heavy in front of it. As it happens, there is a fat man next to you – your only way to stop the trolley is to push him over the bridge and onto the track, killing him to save five. Should you proceed?

Some random philosopher

[-] Clear@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago

No.

In the traditional problem, the man tied to the tracks has no input in the final result, they are just a passive piece of the problem, we can assume what their thinking is and that it is how I rationalized my solution: I would expect the lever to be pulled if I was tied to the tracks and so I pull it myself knowing I would not blame the one pulling the lever for my death.

But in this scenario the man has the ability to act for himself: he can decide to jump. I would never expect him to do so (actually I would never expect 99% of people to pull the lever if they were to die themselves) because that is an action that goes too much against all of our instincts and by pushing them I would, in my opinion, commit a murder.

If I was the fat man I would not jump, and if I was pushed I would absolutely blame the one doing it for my death.

You could think that killing 1 to save 5 is the better outcome, but who decide that 1 human is less worth than those 5? It's just the numbers? Then you could argue that between fighting WWII and submitting to the Nazi the better outcome would have been to not fight them because the people that died in camps were less then the victims of the war. Of course that's an overblown example, but it show why I'm extremely uncomfortable with pushing the fat man: imposing your will on someone who has the ability to act is almost never the answer

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago

Suppose the man is blind then. He has the ability to jump but is unaware of the trolley hurliing towards the people on the track. While he has the ability to act his only "crime" is being unaware. Isn't this equivalent to the original trolley problem?

[I]t may rather be supposed that he is the driver of a runaway tram, which he can only steer from one narrow track on to another; five men are working on one track and one man on the other.

In this case, all six men are unaware of the runaway trolley heading towards them, believing themselves to be safe. The one working on his own track has not made up his mind yet as to whether he would want himself to be sacrificed. You would impose your own will onto him, wouldn't you?

I don't have any solution for variations of the trolley problem that satisfy me. I would likely act based upon what I felt was right at the time without considering (all) the implications. Without the threat of running out of time however, I believe it's much more difficult to decide how to act.