Darros Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 If the one person is someone I know or someone important to me, or a child, I'd run over the 5, otherwise the one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peener weener Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 thats a bold statement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darros Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Well I don't think I'd be able to live with myself if I ran over someone I loved as opposed to 5 strangers. Then again I don't think I'd be able to live with myself if I ran over 5 strangers either. ;/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peener weener Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 (edited) this is a pretty dumb question anyway and not really about what you choose exactly but the nature of the question itself, i guess actually based on the answer you make some assumptions can be made at least from what i know, the question might be applied in other fields but i doubt it i dont think ive seen the video you're talking about but i know of a similar enough idea, and i just spoiled it BRO Edited July 30, 2013 by Stahlypin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fush Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I have too much trouble answering questions which the nature of is too unspecified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darros Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 so you wouldnt make a decision and kill all 6 huh rude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interest Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share Posted July 30, 2013 (edited) I have too much trouble answering questions which the nature of is too unspecified. The question is what it is. I'm keeping the "nature" of the question unspecified because the information provided is all that is needed to set the moral line of thinking for the following question, which will be more specific. It is pretty interesting how much people are thinking outside the box on this one though. Edited July 30, 2013 by Interest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renne Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I'm not sure what video is being talked about, but that's no surprise. Still, I have to go with this answer for mine too: If the one person is someone I know or someone important to me, or a child, I'd run over the 5, otherwise the one. Or rather... I prefer not to kill anyone except myself. So if I can count myself, then one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airship Canon Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Well, because clearly there's other information I'm not being told here for some reason, *Slams brakes and does not change course*. Normally my morality is based in direct cost ratios (where upon, if this was the absolute scenario, no other information even brought up, it'd be the one), but without complete details, I won't make a decision. And if uncertainty is brought into the question (Which it usually is given a scenario like this (*stares at the end of FE:A*), cost of an uncertain value is measured at the absolute minimum.)... Also, how do I know given your scenario, that changing course and striking the one isn't going to derail the train and kill me and my passengers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interest Posted July 31, 2013 Author Share Posted July 31, 2013 Well, because clearly there's other information I'm not being told here for some reason, *Slams brakes and does not change course*. Okay I wasn't being very specific but I made sure to cover THAT loophole.=P You are caught in a situation where you are driving a runaway train and are unable to stop it in any way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leinex Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 You are caught in a situation where you are driving a runaway train and are unable to stop it in any way. Darn it. This choice is too hard. I guess that I'll have to go with one (can it be me?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airship Canon Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 (edited) Okay I wasn't being very specific but I made sure to cover THAT loophole.=P Even with that covered, my actions wouldn't change. My -only- decision would be to hit the brakes, even if I'm in a Mechbeth scenario (AKA: "NO! HIT THE BRAKES! I CAN'T STOP IT!!"), you've left out far too much intel, however, I know something else is in place, to for me to make an actual call. Now, yes, due to the nature of trains, this would imply hitting the 5. I guess you could make the inference that it is extremely hard (borderline impossible) to make me pick the many in a 1 or Many scenario, but you've also crafted a scenario where I don't have the necessary details to make a call. Edited July 31, 2013 by Airship Canon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interest Posted July 31, 2013 Author Share Posted July 31, 2013 (edited) That's effectively the same as doing nothing. Actually I don't care if you answer this is more of an introductory question anyways. Edited July 31, 2013 by Interest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airship Canon Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 That's effectively the same as doing nothing. Actually I don't care if you answer this is more of an introductory question anyways. Effectively, yes. But that's what the question will get out of me at this stage, nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldrick Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 If I was actually in this situation I'd blow the whistle to warn the people on the track I could go either way depending on how the situation came about, but philosophically I would stay the course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclipse Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 I'd close my eyes and stay the course, then claim negligent homicide or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interest Posted July 31, 2013 Author Share Posted July 31, 2013 (edited) Okay now for the follow-up question! Here is the provided video source: Like the previous scenario, there is a runaway train about to run over and kill five people on the tracks, which this time is a single straight track with no alternative paths. However, you are no longer the driver of the train and there is absolutely no way to stop it internally or externally, save one... As an onlooker, you see another individual who, due to any sort of reason you can think of that would make it possible for that individual's body (AND NOT YOURS, SO NO SACRIFICING YOUR BODY TO SAVE THE FIVE) to block the train and stop it just enough to save the five people. By pushing that person onto the track (or whatever method, since it doesn't matter as long as the person ends up on the tracks *by your volition), they will most certainly die but will save the five. Would you push the person over or not? Why? (You do not know these people and there is absolutely nothing that can otherwise alter your moral fiber besides what is already provided in the scenario itself). Feel free to ask me any questions about the question if you want details. (And I really could care less if you try to think outside the box, just please don't be a major smart ass about it.) Oh yeah...my answer. I'd push the guy over. Even though it is definitively murder and goes right against my moral fiber, I would accept the consequences and the loss (see answer to previous question where I believe one tragedy < five) to save five. Edited July 31, 2013 by Interest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airship Canon Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Latter case, I'm not involved to begin with in anyway and would choose to remain so (not involved). It's just not my place. Here I have all the information I need to make a call and am making it- I'd remain uninvolved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fush Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 (edited) For part 1, I would choose one for reasons already mentioned (now that the question has a situation in it). As for part 2... well, sheesh, that'd feel more like direct murder; I would choose pushing the one, but I wouldn't know if I had the guts to do so if I were actually there. Edited July 31, 2013 by The Fush Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wraghelm Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Part 1: Kill the one, it's for the greater good, he'll be a hero Part 2: If his body alone can stop the train, I'm assuming hes a fat loner who hates life and would gladly die and this way his death wouldn't be in vain :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldrick Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 The version I'm familiar with has you as a onlooker in both scenarios. The changing role undermines the point of the exercise; it muddies the waters since it could explain the apparent contradiction in the two answers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightmare Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 I won't push him, because as much as I'll regret not saving the five, I'll regret pushing the one even more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renne Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Okay now for the follow-up question! Here is the provided video source: Like the previous scenario, there is a runaway train about to run over and kill five people on the tracks, which this time is a single straight track with no alternative paths. However, you are no longer the driver of the train and there is absolutely no way to stop it internally or externally, save one... As an onlooker, you see another individual who, due to any sort of reason you can think of that would make it possible for that individual's body (AND NOT YOURS, SO NO SACRIFICING YOUR BODY TO SAVE THE FIVE) to block the train and stop it just enough to save the five people. By pushing that person onto the track (or whatever method, since it doesn't matter as long as the person ends up on the tracks), they will most certainly die but will save the five. Would you push the person over or not? Why? (You do not know these people and there is absolutely nothing that can otherwise alter your moral fiber besides what is already provided in the scenario itself). Feel free to ask me any questions about the question if you want details. (And I really could care less if you try to think outside the box, just please don't be a major smart ass about it.) Oh yeah...my answer. I'd push the guy over. Even though it is definitively murder and goes right against my moral fiber, I would accept the consequences and the loss (see answer to previous question where I believe one tragedy < five) to save five. Hmm... I don't think so.... but I'm not sure. Why can't I just push myself then? >_> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamanoir Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 1. Do nothing, everyone ends dying. If I have no other choice, I'd prefer killing 1 person over 5. 2. I can't push someone on the track. I may try to convince someone else to do it, or to convince him to sacrifice itself. I may probably ending getting killed on the process, though... Or once again, waiting for someone else to take the decision, because I'm too panicked to do anything. So, I guess, it means killing him at the end, but without me doing it directly, because I don't think I'm able to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interest Posted July 31, 2013 Author Share Posted July 31, 2013 (edited) Part 1: Kill the one, it's for the greater good, he'll be a hero Part 2: If his body alone can stop the train, I'm assuming hes a fat loner who hates life and would gladly die and this way his death wouldn't be in vain :) Lol that was the example the professor used, but in this case, you can't assume that =P. Hmm... I don't think so.... but I'm not sure. Why can't I just push myself then? >_> Because it ruins the purpose of the philosophical question =P. I could've easily asked it in such as way that all you have to do is push a button and you kill one person to stop five people from being killed but where's the realism in that? ;o I'd sacrifice myself too if I had the option. I'm overweight enough. Edited July 31, 2013 by Interest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.