The trolley problem...

[MrWeedMcGrass]

I can't see how ignoring the situation absolves you of any guilt for the deaths of the 5.

Once you've been exposed to the situation such as this your involved in it.

If you walked past a woman being battered in an alley would you not intervene? If not, how could you live with yourself afterwards?

Guilt is an emotion experienced differently by different people , its a matter of personal philosophy. For me , what I haven't started , I should not interrupt or change, especially if the choices present cannot be properly evaluated to come to a correct decision. In this case , I am not aware of the identity of the 6 people involved so i am not morally entitled to make a decision in that regard. My decision to send the lone person to his/her death to save five might seem superfluously logical and correct , but on further analysis , it cannot be definitely determined if the choice is as simple as it seems.

So I believe in not intervening in this case and make myself a passive observer , a man watching television. The idea is to let things take their course in a manner if I was not present there with the ability to alter the course.

So , In this case , not doing any thing is a valid option and not an immoral one , in my opinion.

[Stevo985]

I can't see how ignoring the situation absolves you of any guilt for the deaths of the 5.

Once you've been exposed to the situation such as this your involved in it.

If you walked past a woman being battered in an alley would you not intervene? If not, how could you live with yourself afterwards?

Think of it this way, instead of a train, the mad philosopher has a gun and is about to shoot 5 people, unless you take the gun and kill 1 person yourself. Surely you standing there and watching him kill 5 people means you are less guilty (and I'm again talking from a legal perspective, not emotional) than if you'd physically shot 1 person and killed them.

[tonyh29]

and then what if it turns out that the 5 you saved were suicide bombers on their way to kill 10,000 people and the one you let die had just moments before discovered a cure for cancer and was rushing home to find a pen and paper to write it down

to some extent i'm a believer of when your time is up your time is up ..maybe i'd just let fate decide who lives and who dies

[kidlewis]

I'd either be too busy on Villa Talk or too busy playing Battlefield 2 to be able to notice this trolley heading towards the 5 people.

so they would end up getting owned. 5 kill streak FTW!

[mjmooney]

Surely Superman would swoop down and lift the trolley off the rails?

[Milfner]

I'd either be too busy on Villa Talk or too busy playing Battlefield 2 to be able to notice this trolley heading towards the 5 people.

so they would end up getting owned. 5 kill streak FTW!

[Wainy316]

and then what if it turns out that the 5 you saved were suicide bombers on their way to kill 10,000 people and the one you let die had just moments before discovered a cure for cancer and was rushing home to find a pen and paper to write it down

to some extent i'm a believer of when your time is up your time is up ..maybe i'd just let fate decide who lives and who dies

Fate or the mad philosopher?

[mjmooney]

and then what if it turns out that the 5 you saved were suicide bombers on their way to kill 10,000 people and the one you let die had just moments before discovered a cure for cancer and was rushing home to find a pen and paper to write it down

to some extent i'm a believer of when your time is up your time is up ..maybe i'd just let fate decide who lives and who dies

Fate or the mad philosopher?

Darren Paul Griffith has a lot to answer for.

[zak]

Would you have as much responsibility for the 5 dying as you would for the one? I don't think you would.

If i knew i could have saved them but by doing nothing they died, then yes, I would feel responsible etc.

Fair enough, I may very well feel that way too.

But I was also talking about legal responsibility. What's worse? Neglect that killed 5 people, or a direct action which killed 1?

Personally, i wouldnt even think about legal responsibility, i think i would take the chance of any legel actions to save net of 4 people

i understand life would always be different after killing this one person but the fact you saved 5 would help you through

[snowychap]

Surely Superman would swoop down and lift the trolley off the rails?

Well, the one in Tony's avatar would probably just claim that he had done it. :winkold:

[Jon]

Surely Superman would swoop down and lift the trolley off the rails?

Well, the one in Tony's avatar would probably just claim that he had done it. :winkold:

whereas in fact the trolley simply broke down of it's own accord due to chronic underfunding during construction.....

[GarethRDR]

It's a trolley! I'd just wait for the thing to bump into the first person it hits and stop, them to go "ouch" and stand up with (most likely) no more than a bruise. I'd then return said trolley to whatever supermarket it came from, link it's chain to the next trolley and retrieve the £1 coin.

There's your ideal scenario: no one's dead and I'm up a quid!

[ozvillafan]

Life is sacred.

You leave the switch the hell alone and do whatever you can to save the other 5 - as useless as that may be.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

The real answer here is to assess the situation, decide your **** eitherway then go home and have a wank.

[Gingerlad]

Depends, am I allowed to video it?

[mjmooney]

Gingerlad wants to video CED having a wank.

[Gingerlad]

Gingerlad wants to video CED having a wank.

Not again. Once is enough for anybody.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

This thread just took a serious turn down '....' alley.

[YLN]

But we'd all press the switch that makes us completely forget that anyone might die at all yes? The backwards in time switch that makes the mad philosopher pick someone else for his dilemma.

[KevMur]

I would pop down to the person who was tied to the track on their own.

Get his / her thoughts on the situation.