Interesting philosophical question :)

[TheQwertiest]

(01-22-2013 03:30 AM)aaronINdayton Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 03:13 AM)TheQwertiest Wrote:  here are more moral dilemmas that aaron would not like

These are much more realistic!

1. Don't kick the chair, if the guard kills someone else it's the guard's fault not yours. If you're able to defend your son, defend your son.

2. Go immediately to your supervisor about an email regarding violation of HR policies. If the company does nothing, find another job and telling your friend is up to you.

Updated-
3. too unrealistic for me
4. too unrealistic for me

stopped reading, thanks for posting though!

your answers just made me think of a reason on why they dont make realistic scenarios.

i think the reason is because in realistic situations, you would not be limited to a few choices which they need to make a judgement on your level of reasoning.
ex. in the first dilemma they only want to know if youd kick the chair to have less people die or youd save yourself from the horror of killing your own son and letting 1 more person die.

[TheGreatErenan]

(01-22-2013 03:38 AM)aaronINdayton Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 03:22 AM)Erenan Wrote:  Suppose you are given the choice between one person's death and five people's deaths. Further suppose that you absolutely must choose one of these two options and that no other options are available. Which option do you choose?

I don't see how people dying is ever your choice. It would be your choice to kill someone, for whatever reasons. It would not be your choice for an accident to occur (runaway trolley) that will kill 5 people near you, that's an accident.

Obviously. I'm not arguing that it's realistic.

What I said is that it's an abstract scenario with no real-life context. My point is that the Trolley Problem is an attempt to apply such an abstract scenario to one that has some semblance of "real-life context," nevermind how unlikely such a scenario is to occur. This is so people will be more willing to respond and to try to make it seem more important.

I'm commenting more on the psychology of question posers and question responders than on the actual validity or usefulness of the question.

My question is about which question is preferable. The purely abstract one or the one with a contrived real-world context?

[TheQwertiest]

you two should read this
link

[TheGreatErenan]

(01-22-2013 04:00 AM)TheQwertiest Wrote:  you two should read this
link

Thank you. A very interesting and enlightening read.

[Lrimas]

(01-22-2013 03:18 AM)Wildtalon1851 Wrote:  As I said before, funnily, many are disgusted by the actual TOUCHING of the man on the bridge, but are happily able to sacrifice man for four as long as there is no physical contact. It's just the same dilemma phrased different ways.
Interesting...

---

it's not really though - one is allowing someone to die, the other is physically killing someone - a huge difference.

I wouldn't do it either. My reasoning:
Since I am close enough to push the guy onto the track, I am also close enough so I can jump in front of it myself. While I would love to say "yeah, I would do that", the simple fact is that there is no way I would. If I''m not willing to sacrifice my life for 4 other people, how can I force someone else to do it?

[Wildt4lon]

No Lrimas it is, by making the train run left you are still killing someone: just like if you run over someone with a car, you're not touching them but you still killed.
Oh, and, in the actual question, the man is fat. Only he is fat enough to stop the train. So it's still the same choices.

[Lrimas]

(01-22-2013 08:00 AM)Wildtalon1851 Wrote:  No Lrimas it is, by making the train run left you are still killing someone: just like if you run over someone with a car, you're not touching them but you still killed.
Oh, and, in the actual question, the man is fat. Only he is fat enough to stop the train. So it's still the same choices.

Hmmm, you are right, it both feels wrong to me. Don't you think it's more a question of realism? I can easily imagine the "pull the lever" to have the desired effect, while throwing the fat man over (a pretty "big" task) might not be achievable, and even if it is, it might not have the desired affect?

[TheGreatErenan]

(01-22-2013 03:31 AM)Wildtalon1851 Wrote:  I would, with the jamming-the-mechanism question, do nothing. To live with the knowledge of murder of a loved one is worse than death.

Yes, this is my response as well.

---

Here is a highly generalized hypothetical ethical scenario for you to ponder:

Suppose you are an aspiring television actress who has so far had only small supporting roles. However, by engaging in a brief affair with a powerful network executive, you have recently managed to secure for yourself a lead role in a major telenovela to air on a large Spanish language television station. After a few days of filming, your boyfriend learns of the affair and is angry at you. At the end of a tense confrontation, he ultimately does not break off your relationship but demands that you promise not to be unfaithful again. You agree and continue filming the novela.

In time you slowly begin to develop feelings for the lead actor on set, but you tell yourself that it's nothing, just a sort of subconscious form of method acting. At last the day comes when you must kiss this lead actor on film, and you suddenly become overwhelmed with feelings of anxiety at being unfaithful to your boyfriend, even if it's only a kiss. Luckily, the lead actor suffers an unexpected blow to the head and falls into a coma. Filming is put on hold until he regains consciousness or a suitable replacement can be found. The futures of the novela and your career are unclear.

Shortly thereafter, one of the supporting actresses approaches you and reveals that she knows all about your affair with the executive. She threatens to make the information public unless you persuade the network executive to offer the female lead role to her and the male lead role to her boyfriend. However, you doubt that the executive would agree to do so unless you have a second affair with him.

Unsure what to do, you visit the bed-ridden lead actor in the hospital and as you sit next to his bed, he opens his eyes and begins to ask a series of confused questions. The doctors arrive and tell you to leave, and you are soon informed that he is suffering from a traditional headblow-induced amnestic disorder.

Meanwhile, your sister calls and informs you that your ailing grandmother has taken a turn for the worst and insists that you should come home to be with her. Leaving the big city, however, would mean losing out on the significant salary associated with your role on the novela, which would surely go a long way in paying for your grandmother's medical bills. Furthermore, you believe that if your affair with the executive were to be made public, the associated moral failure of the deed would dangerously exacerbate the severity of your grandmother's condition once she heard of it.

As you ponder your situation while walking down the street, the lead actor approaches you wearing a hospital gown after apparently escaping from the hospital. He declares that upon seeing you at his bed's side in the hospital he fell deeply in love-at-first-sight with you and promptly asks you to marry him.

Suddenly, your boyfriend leaps from the bushes and pulls a gun on the lead actor out of blind stupid jealousy. A struggle takes place and the gun goes off, unintentionally killing the boyfriend of the supporting actress from before, who had been hiding behind yet another bush nearby to keep tabs on your activity.

Your boyfriend is tried and convicted of murder and subsequently put in prison. Luckily, your affair with the executive is not exposed. Soon after, you bump into your boyfriend's sister at the supermarket and she gives you the latest chisme: Her brother has coincidentally been placed in a cell with an old man who happens to be the brother of the very same immoral network executive associated with your novela. The man claims he has been framed by his evil brother and wrongly imprisoned for killing a business rival twenty-three years ago. He further claims that he knows the location of evidence that can exonerate him and put his brother behind bars where he belongs.

You seek out and acquire the evidence, and sure enough it undeniably proves the executive's wrongdoing. Furthermore, it reveals that the business rival killed twenty-three years ago was your biological father, who had died just before you were born.

You suppose that you could use the evidence to blackmail the executive. You further suppose that you could turn the evidence over to the police. You even further suppose that the situation has become deeply personal and that an eye-for-an-eye vengeance upon your father's killer might be more fitting.

However, you fear that attempting to incarcerate or kill the executive might lead to your affair being made public information or the scandalous end of your acting career or your own imprisonment.

You wonder about the fate of your grandmother and how best to ensure her recovery. You fear that by leaving the big city in favor of being with your family, you will not be capable of paying for the medical bills associated with your grandmother's condition, and if the evil supporting actress were to make your affair public, all the more likely now that her boyfriend is dead, your grandmother's condition would likely worsen. However, you also fear that staying in the city will ruin your family's opinion of you, even if you continue to send money home to help pay for the bills.

You further wonder about whether your boyfriend is in fact a good choice for a primary love interest... er... significant other. And what about that amnesiac lead actor? Would he be a better choice?

What do you do?

[Alvendor]

Interesting thread, regarding the lever and fat man issue. Am I in the minority in that I would pull the lever but would not push the man?

[GoHeat 3]

(01-22-2013 09:12 AM)Alvendor Wrote:  Interesting thread, regarding the lever and fat man issue. Am I in the minority in that I would pull the lever but would not push the man?

I agree with you and so does TheQwertiest!