Trolley Problem

[Mathew]

Hey,
This isn't a debate per se, but more of an ethical dilemma which we were discussing in Psychology a couple of weeks ago. I just found the original issue on Wikipedia, and it turns out that it was developed by a woman called Philippa Foot in 1967.

Suppose that a judge or magistrate is faced with rioters demanding that a culprit be found for a certain crime and threatening otherwise to take their own bloody revenge on a particular section of the community. The real culprit being unknown, the judge sees himself as able to prevent the bloodshed only by framing some innocent person and having him executed. Beside this example is placed another in which a pilot whose aeroplane is about to crash is deciding whether to steer from a more to a less inhabited area. To make the parallel as close as possible it 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; anyone on the track he enters is bound to be killed. In the case of the riots the mob have five hostages, so that in both the exchange is supposed to be one man's life for the lives of five.

So what would you do?
Would you steer the trolley to the track with one man? Would you live with the guilt of knowing you were responsible for his death? Would you leave it hurtling towards the five people and take no action? Would you live with the guilt of knowing you're responsible for five deaths?

A very tough one indeed!

[The Don]

utilitarianism. I'd kill the one person directly rather than indirectly killing five people.

[beth]

what, why can't people write in clearer sentences my brain aches trying to decipher.

anyway 1 dead person is just as bad as 5 dead people in my opinion and i'd hate to know i'd *made* the choice to take his life so i'd probably let the train take its natural course.

[The Don]

what, why can't people write in clearer sentences my brain aches trying to decipher.

anyway 1 dead person is just as bad as 5 dead people in my opinion and i'd hate to know i'd *made* the choice to take his life so i'd probably let the train take its natural course.

lol what how is 1 persons life worth that of 5 peoples lives? that's 5 different families all affected whereas you have the choice to save 4 families.

and you are making the choice to kill the 5 people, you are in control of it ,you choose whether it hits those five people or move it off the track to hit 1, it's not on a natural course ,whatever happens, you have influence on it so regardless it's your choice, so you're choosing to indirectly kill 5 people (you're still killing them through no intervention) instead of killing 1 person

[beth]

lol what how is 1 persons life worth that of 5 peoples lives? that's 5 different families all affected whereas you have the choice to save 4 families.

and you are making the choice to kill the 5 people, you are in control of it ,you choose whether it hits those five people or move it off the track to hit 1, it's not on a natural course ,whatever happens, you have influence on it so regardless it's your choice, so you're choosing to indirectly kill 5 people (you're still killing them through no intervention) instead of killing 1 person

i'm talking for me personally i could not live with thinking that instead of letting what is going to happen happen i messed with it and it ended up with someone dead.

i think in reality i'd probably kill myself first and then what happens happens.

[FlyingJesus]

What kind of fool doesn't get off the track if a train's hurtling toward them

[The Don]

What kind of fool doesn't get off the track if a train's hurtling toward them

what kind of fool is on the track in the first place?

[FlyingJesus]

Well it does say they're working, although any tram company that has people working on all possible tracks at the same time is liable for a massive lawsuit anyway

[GommeInc]

I think this question appeared in AS Philosophy. All I remember saying is that I'd have it go for the one man rather than the group, purely because there's one less life rather than five, which will have different effects on other people (friend, relative etc etc) AND if one person sees something hurtling towards them, they can easily avoid it while a group means 5 people tackling to get out the way.