Life and Death: The Trolly Problem

[sensational204]

So here's how it works..

Suppose there's a train heading down a track through a ravine. Up ahead, the track splits. It's currently set to send the train down the right track. But down that track there are 4 people working, and they would have no time to get out of the way of the train. Down the left track there's only 1 person working on the track, but he/she would also have no time to avoid the train. You are at the track switch, and have the ability to switch the track.

So here are the two moral questions to answer.

1. Assuming you don't know any of these people personally - are you morally permitted to switch from the right track, with the 4 people, to the left, with just one?

2. Are you morally obligated to switch the track from the right to the left?

Once you answered those questions, then there are a million subtle variations of it you can consider.. like what if it was a hundred people, or a thousand, or a million instead of 4? What if someone on the track was someone you knew or loved? Even if you didn't know them personally, would their ages matter? Their sexes? Their character? Their nationality?

With each variation you still have the same two basic questions.. are you morally permitted, and are you morally obligated? Difficult questions, but I think it's really interesting to think about.

 

[Image]

I wouldn't do a thing to change it's course. Morally, I feel I shouldn't mess with anyone's fate other than my own... And besides, IMO, morality is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Lasher]

So here's how it works..

Suppose you open a thread and some fucktard has posted another stupid hypothetical question. Up ahead, the Lit Board splits. It's currently set to send the thread down the Generally Bored. But down that track there are 4 people waiting to bash the stupid fucktard and his stupid question, and they would have no time to get out of the way of the thread. Down the Playground there's only 1 person who would even think of bashing the stupid fucktard, but he/she would also have no time to avoid the thread. You come across the thread first, and have the ability to switch the track of the thread.

Do you...

1) Nicely tell the thread starter that maybe people in the Playground would appreciate this kind of thread more, even though you really don't care, have never been to the Playground, and just want the thread to go away...

or...

2) Do you bash the stupid fucktard who posted the thread before anyone else gets the chance?

 

[Sukit_beatch!]

Ponch would ride in and save the workers. Ponch would make a split second assessment of where the children and women were and Ponch would save them first. Ponch wouldn't accept the thanks due a hero. Ponch would just be doing Ponch's duty to make the highways safe. Later, while Ponch was dancing Ponch's Love Lambada, Ponch would reflect back on a successful day.

 

[T.J. Jackson]

So here's how it works..

Suppose you open a thread and some fucktard has posted another stupid hypothetical question. Up ahead, the Lit Board splits. It's currently set to send the thread down the Generally Bored. But down that track there are 4 people waiting to bash the stupid fucktard and his stupid question, and they would have no time to get out of the way of the thread. Down the Playground there's only 1 person who would even think of bashing the stupid fucktard, but he/she would also have no time to avoid the thread. You come across the thread first, and have the ability to switch the track of the thread.

Do you...

1) Nicely tell the thread starter that maybe people in the Playground would appreciate this kind of thread more, even though you really don't care, have never been to the Playground, and just want the thread to go away...

or...

2) Do you bash the stupid fucktard who posted the thread before anyone else gets the chance?

Damn that made me laugh today....thanks.

 

[Image]

So here's how it works..

Suppose you open a thread and some fucktard has posted another stupid hypothetical question. Up ahead, the Lit Board splits. It's currently set to send the thread down the Generally Bored. But down that track there are 4 people waiting to bash the stupid fucktard and his stupid question, and they would have no time to get out of the way of the thread. Down the Playground there's only 1 person who would even think of bashing the stupid fucktard, but he/she would also have no time to avoid the thread. You come across the thread first, and have the ability to switch the track of the thread.

Do you...

1) Nicely tell the thread starter that maybe people in the Playground would appreciate this kind of thread more, even though you really don't care, have never been to the Playground, and just want the thread to go away...

or...

2) Do you bash the stupid fucktard who posted the thread before anyone else gets the chance?

Why doesn't anyone ever bash the "Which flowers are prettier" kind of crap, fluff threads that are so deserving of it? Feeling threatened by intellectual thought?

 

[patient1]

So here's how it works..

Suppose you open a thread and some fucktard has posted another stupid hypothetical question. Up ahead, the Lit Board splits. It's currently set to send the thread down the Generally Bored. But down that track there are 4 people waiting to bash the stupid fucktard and his stupid question, and they would have no time to get out of the way of the thread. Down the Playground there's only 1 person who would even think of bashing the stupid fucktard, but he/she would also have no time to avoid the thread. You come across the thread first, and have the ability to switch the track of the thread.

Do you...

1) Nicely tell the thread starter that maybe people in the Playground would appreciate this kind of thread more, even though you really don't care, have never been to the Playground, and just want the thread to go away...

or...

2) Do you bash the stupid fucktard who posted the thread before anyone else gets the chance?

Laughing
Out
Loud
with tears.

 

[Lasher]

Why doesn't anyone ever bash the "Which flowers are prettier" kind of crap, fluff threads that are so deserving of it? Feeling threatened by intellectual thought?

I just think it's funny when people try and hide fluff behind psuedo-intellectualism.

This is just as fluffy as "which flowers are prettier" and deserves scorn because a "which flowers are prettier" thread is at least being honest about what it is.

Crap like this shouldn't exist outside of freshman level philosophy classes.

 

[Image]

I just think it's funny when people try and hide fluff behind psuedo-intellectualism.

This is just as fluffy as "which flowers are prettier" and deserves scorn because a "which flowers are prettier" thread is at least being honest about what it is.

Crap like this shouldn't exist outside of freshman level philosophy classes.

OK, Ok, I see your point and perhaps your assessment is correct in this case. But still, honest or not, why are those threads so popular? The women are so sickenly sweet and cute and the men just fall all over eachother to respond in kind. Same old story, I guess. I do appreciate your humor though...(generally bored ).

 

[sensational204]

I don't think the question is fluff at all. And it's not meant to be pretentious. I thought about the question because of what's going on in Iraq right now. There are all kinds of questions about the values of life and death that we never stop to think about. Of course, what we would do hypothetically isn't always what we would do when in a situation, but I think at least thinking about the qeustions can teach us something.

For example with Iraq. Does it make sense to kill x number or people in order to potentially save y number of people? How many Iraqi lives are as valuable as an American life?

I don't think the questions are fluff at all. It just depends on how deeply you want to look into it.

"There is nothing either deep or shallow but sinking makes it so."

 

[Image]

The problems in the world today exist because so many people don't take the time to think about those very kinds of questions...

For what it's worth I didn't think your question was fluff, especially citing the cutesy ones. And don't even get me started on the latest political debates here...

 

[Cheyenne]

Crap like this shouldn't exist outside of freshman level philosophy classes.

Perhaps the thread starter is in school and needed help with this week's homework assignment?

 

[patient1]

I don't think the question is fluff at all. And it's not meant to be pretentious. I thought about the question because of what's going on in Iraq right now. There are all kinds of questions about the values of life and death that we never stop to think about. Of course, what we would do hypothetically isn't always what we would do when in a situation, but I think at least thinking about the qeustions can teach us something.

For example with Iraq. Does it make sense to kill x number or people in order to potentially save y number of people? How many Iraqi lives are as valuable as an American life?

I don't think the questions are fluff at all. It just depends on how deeply you want to look into it.

"There is nothing either deep or shallow but sinking makes it so."

Don't take it personally , Lasher was also parodying another discussion topic about newbies are treated.

Just to show that we're not so bad, I'll take your question seriously-

I'm not a fatalist. I feel entitled to act to minimize death & destruction, even in a no-win situation. I know that's how I would re-act because that's what I did a few years ago in a traffic accident.

As for War verses open ended torture & starvation under a sanctioned dictatorship, it's kind of like comparing a storm to a drought..

A storm comes, people take cover, the survivors rebuild.
A drought comes, & while it isn't dramatic, it not only kills more people due to starvation & dirty water, but it sucks all of the hope out of the survivors.

Sanctions hurt the weak & the innocent first & most.
War targets the responsible parties.

If the figures coming out of Iraq regarding sanctions are to be believed, it's been much worse for the people than the war.

I decline your how many Iraqi lives are worth an American life question.

 

[Lasher]

Here's the why the question is complete bullshit and has no bearing on real life situations.

The problem is that it's completely artificial and and provides no information with which to make an informed decision. Things we would know if the question were real:

Why am I at the switch?
-Do I work for the railroad?
-Am I a terrorist?
-Am I someone who gets off on trains?
-Am I just randomly passing by?
-I'm Snidely Whiplash?

What kind of switch is it?
-Manual?
-Electronic?

Where is the switch?
-On the tracks near the potential accident?
-In a building far, far away?

How do I know these people are on the track?
-I'm close enough to see them?
-I'm watching them on video?
-I sent them there?
-I'm psychic?

If I'm close enough to see the train, turn the switch, and know there are people on the tracks, why can't I warn them to get off the tracks?

If I have time to switch the train on to different tracks, why can't these people know that the train is coming and get the hell out of the way? Train tracks are only a few feet wide. Even that fat ass Vern got off the tracks before the train hit him.

I could go on and on, but you see my point.

It's a bullshit question and it only exists to make people feel good and believe they're thinking. If you're thinking you don't answer the question, you question why it's being asked.

 

[sensational204]

That's ridiculous Lasher. Those things are just pretenses to avoid facing the questions. None of them are relevent to the basic issue being discussed. Is the situation hypothetical and idealized? Yes. Does that make it meaningless? Absolutely not.

It's like when you get a word problem in math. The point isn't to nitpick the details of the problem or you'd be missing the whole value of the question. Obviously anything not mentioned in the problem is either assumed to be irrelevant or out of your control. Just like with math, you'll probably never have a real world problem that's that idealized, but the basic principles can still be true in more complicated situations.

 

[Guest]

Put something on the track and derail the train. You said nothing about people on it.