The Trolley Problem: The Most Weird Thougth Experiment

by



This is the trolley problem: Picture yourself next to tram tracks. In the distance, a trolley is racing uncontrollably towards five workers who can’t hear it. Even if they see it, they won’t have time to escape. You see a lever by the tracks. Pulling it would send the trolley onto another track, away from the five workers. But, there’s another worker on this other track, unaware like the others. Would you pull the lever, causing one death but saving five?

Ways to Support the Channel ❤️

Check out my ebook ► https://30challenges30days.com
Buy me a coffee ► https://www.buymeacoffee.com/metamorphosis77
Donate on Paypal ► https://paypal.me/andrianiliopoulos
Donate ₿itcoin ► 345jY1BjcuPoVutB6tLAFW6z23aY8sCvNX

Social Media:

► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_metamorphosis_77/
► Twitter: https://twitter.com/adrian_ilio
► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/metamorphosis77official
► TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@metamorphosis_77

Sources:

Neal fun: https://neal.fun/absurd-trolley-problems/
Nicholas video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N_RZJUAQY4
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/topic/trolley-problem
Philosophy now: https://philosophynow.org/issues/116/Could_There_Be_A_Solution_To_The_Trolley_Problem

source

6 thoughts on “The Trolley Problem: The Most Weird Thougth Experiment”

  2. In my opinion, such extreme thought experiments have little or no value for our real, living understanding of human ethics and morality. I would think if such a situation were really faced by someone and they actually made a conscious decision one way or the other, either way I would go back to the old, 'Judge not, lest you be judged'.

    Reply

  3. Deontological ethics do run into major problems though, don't they…. like… Define the action being contemplated. Am I contemplating intervention itself? My guilt I may feel if I do nothing? The manual touching and moving of the lever? Or is the action "actually" always the same – "Commit a willful act to alter the outcome of a deadly situation?" What if you don't notice the imminent accident? What if you choose to (confidently) believe it won't actually kill them? What if you sincerely believe this is a simulated reality and therefore don't think death is such a big deal anyway? What if you believe those 5 innocents will go to heaven instead of certain "hell" if they were to die naturally but sinful?

    I also take issue with the apparent requirement that I must see this as a CATEGORY problem, not as THIS PARTICULAR problem . How I might decide to act in another (similar but different) situation may not at all be comparable to this specific circumstance.

    Reply

  4. Also – why is choosing not to act less of an "action" than choosing to act? Both are the result of some mental contemplation, and so both should be equal. The moment I decide not to act I ALSO condemn five people to die, and in a way, must be "guilty" of deciding this is the "correct" course of action. It would be very disingenuous to claim "choosing not to choose" is somehow morally OK, but the opposite isn't.

    Just as well. choosing not to act could be most credibly construed as cowardly, or callous. The moment you become aware of the situation and your (potential) role in it, you already are a part of the situation, whatever you do ….

    Reply

  5. If you could hypothetically gauge the true, overall cost/benefit to society of pulling the lever, then I feel you would have a moral obligation to make the more beneficial decision. The lack of information about who these people are makes it seem difficult because, even though 5 instead of 1 seems correct, there is the possibility that it could be the wrong decision.
    If you know for certain what the outcome would be, then i feel it wouldn't be a difficult choice at all

    Reply

Leave a Comment