You should be able to solve this
>>902124
What problem is there to solve?
>>902124
I pull the lever. More people (the families and friends of the victims) would be pissed at me if I didn't.
I'm supposed to kill the single person to save the other five, right?
>>902138
You can do whatever. The rationale behind your decision is what is important.
Already been answered, multi-track drifting is the only universally ethical choice.
I'd let the five die. Malthus was right.
>>902138
Im not sure how someone can be so morally bankrupt.
>>902124
I'd push the fat man.
I wouldn't harvest the stranger's organs.
I would rob the pharmacy.
I would steal the bread.
I let the five die under the train, then kill that one guy left and finally i kill myself.
>>902161
>>902124
>>902124
walk away nigga
Pull the lever the other way and make the trolley go backwards :^)
>>902124
I depends on the individuals, who's worth saving. Maybe the 5 people are scumbags, and the one individual is a great guy
Pull the lever, then push it back
>>902238
Kek.
This is by far the best version,
>>90000
>>902124
It would be best just not to know about this problems existence.
>>902149
clarify the difference between case one and two, they seem inconsistent
>>902455
this is the only solution
not touch the lever
pulling it would be a direct act of murder of an individual
not pulling it means I can plead ignorance in court and state I was unaware of the levers presence
>>902124
Don't press the switch, wait until the train passes and then press it.
Get further away and wait until a second train passes, then go home. Nobody will ever know you were there.
suicide is the only solution
>>902124
If those are Muslims, Jews or Niggers, I'd happily take one for the team and let the tram run it's course
This is really simple.
It's a though experiment, it's imaginary.
It has no effect on reality.
I play imaginary vidya and watch imaginary movies with high body counts and sick loop de loops.
No one says this is morally wrong. It's completely acceptable.
So obviously, go for the highest kill count.
"Solve" implies that there is a correct answer
>>902124
If I don't know them, I save the majority.
If I have information about them, I save whomever I can reason has more value to me (either directly or indirectly).
There's no objetive solution.
>>902124
I don't pull the lever and let the other die of hunger
Did I solve it?
>>902148
came here to post this
>>902162
kill the workers
they are assholes
>>902124
Walk away.
If I pull the lever or stay there I will get sued by someone either way. If I walk/run away to get help i'll be fine.
The only reason one wouldn't pull the lever is the selfish desire to wash themselves of direct blame.
Pull the railroad switch halfway to break the path of the track, causing the trolley to be derailed.
Do nothing and just watch and laugh
Pull the switch.
Come to the horrifying realization that life is meaningless and you are one switch pull away from a miserable, lonely death.
Drown on depression and self-loath.
Become a nihilist.
Realize morals are a thinly veiled excuse for statal and social opression.
Become morally deprived.
Profit on human misery and pain.
Become bat-themed self-purported vigilante.
You have become Batman. Congratulations, you have won at life.
Realize the trolley is a spook.
>>902568
You're a big dilemma
>>902124
>not killing both
Why leave them alive fuck everything
This problem never got me because to me inaction is an action.
To me it's the choice of killing five people or one person.
>>902124
>not jumping in front of the train
>>902930
Requesting a >functional strength version of this
The gains train dilemma is real
>>902124
Make the train kill one, save the rest. If I were in the position of the single guy stuck in the tracks, I would understand.
Now, if you tell me there 5 dudes stuck on the trails are clinically retarded, and the single one is a genius, then I kill the retards. This should be obvious to anyone, guilt is not an excuse for not saving as many valuable lives as possible.
>>902124
Walk away. Never touch the lever.
There's no reason to interfere unless i'm invested. This picture illustrates no such investment.
>>902124
I'd run down and try to free the people from the tracks. Even though I won't be able to free them in time. My act of morality will impress the judges.
If they are all just generic human 1 2 3 etc then pull the lever. If there are women of childbearing age in the group of 5 pull the lever. If there are children in the group of 5 pull the lever if there is less than 3 children and the rest of the group is of childbearing age. If the group of 5 is all children pull the lever if 3 or more are female and the one is an adult. If two or less female and the one is a female don't pull. If the one is attractive female don't pull. If group of 5 has more than 1 attractive female pull provided that one is average male. If all average men in group of 5 and ugly 1 pull lever. If the one has considerable wealth that will be given to you to save their life dont pull. If group of 5 has wealth pull. 4 out of group of 5 females over childbearing age and the one is a male dont pull lever. Tl;dr be a young hot woman with money.
>>902473
Its surely the final solution
With morality there's no right or wrong.
>"But if there is no right or wrong you might as well save the most people!"
No matter what you do you will feel guilty, so it's best to not get involved and let fate run it's course.
>>902124
A death is guaranteed. Five deaths is not guaranteed. Refusing to choose is still a choice. Pull the lever.
>>902433
Harvesting organs means fewer people go to hospitals or sign up to be organ donors. Ergo you fuck over more people in the long run.
This is the actual reasoning for never simply allowing an organ donor to die-even if it's a 98 year old nazi and he has the ONLY kidney that will match an otherwise healthy 9 year old girl.
>>902124
Not acting is not acting. Pulling teh lever is murder, watching five men die would be horrific but at least you couldn't be sued by their families.
>>903346
>CHinese morals
>>902124
Post the /pol/ version.
>>902142
yes, but more importantly, killing innocents is always more wrong than not saving the lives of innocents, no matter the numbers
also the vast majority of people are miserable, so from a utilitarian perspective the more deaths the better.
>>903084
>>903086
>>903088
>tfw it doesn't change the calculation at all
>>903120
>>902124
>implying morality exists
>implying I shouldn't kill the most
>implying I shouldn't kill the least
>implying I should make the decision
>implying my close proximity to a track shifting apparatus somehow makes me morally responsible for possible outcomes
>implying I can be either right or wrong without a categorical imperative or divine command
>>903392
>killing innocents is always more wrong than not saving the lives of innocents
Why?
Who set this up? Why am I responsible for it at all and the person who put the people there isn't?
>>903432
Because doing evil is worse than just not doing something good.
>>903459
Not doing something good is evil. The only reason not to believe this is to absolve yourself of the guilt that comes from not trying to make the world a better place every waking moment.
>>903470
But one is clearly more evil. Who is a worse person overall, A serial killer with a job or a NEET?
Well according to my country's law, if you didn't cause the situation or you don't have a responsibility due law or contract, you can not be punished for ignoring this situation.
>>903487
A more accurate question is, who is more evil, the man who kills a child with a knife or the man who refuses to save a drowning child from a shallow backyard pool?
There's two ways of looking at this. Pragmatically and from a personal moral standpoint.
'If' I know that someone will certainly die. Pragmatically I must pull the lever.
From a personal standpoint fuck that. I'm not accepting the blame for killing someone. This doesn't involve me.
>>903507
I would still say the man with the knife. Being directly responsible for someonbes death is still worse than simply not saving them
>>903256
>with morality there is no right or wrong
Morality is in fact the concept of (normative) right and wrong.
>>902124
>multi
>track
>drifting
I pull the lever to avoid social stigma from the people who think 'fewer death = better', which is pretty much everyone.
>>903084
Pulling the lever three times would take the volley through the path of less death, so it is the most logical path.
>>903084
>multitrack drifting can't solve this
>>903554
So saving a child from drowning isn't in the range of responsibility?
Morality is a spook boys.
>>903918
I never said that at all, I still think its wrong to not save the child, I just think that murder is worse.
>>902203
is that lyndon b johnson?
Pull the lever. It's objectively the right thing to do. However, our brains are wired with alarms and red flags if we ever have to decide to kill someone. That's why is is seemingly a tough decision. Our brain just really doesn't want us to commit murder. Dual-processing yo.
Pray to the Lord for divine guidance
>>903918
that'd only apply if you had to kill the child's friend to use as a raft
>>902496
You can still pull the lever and plead ignorance saying you thought the lever would stop the trolley
Inaction resulting in the death of five or action resulting in the death of one.
If inaction is as bad as action with what result you get, then pulling the leaver to let one die over five is better, fewer suffering is caused.
>>903420
it's all subjective but, think of the lives of who die.
would you rather 5 normal people die or 1?
>>903420
>morality doesn't exist lolzzz
Congrats reaching the age of 16, now answer the question.
>>902124
Obviously you'd direct the car to the position where it kills the lowest possible number of white people.
>But what if the lone guy is white and just one of the five other guys is white, too?
That's the tricky thing about this question. The outcome then depends on whether you consider it virtuous to kill non-whites or to save their lives. I'm not sure what I'd answer yet but nevertheless thanks for the intresting thread, OP!
>>903505
Where you from?https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue
I'd pull the lever once the trolley is halfway engaged onto one track. It'll either result in multitracks drifting or a trolley wreck which could be blamed on malfunction due to no luck.
>>902124
STUPID HYPOTHETICALS MOTHERSUCKER BIC
LOL "SOLVE" THE PROBLEM.
the observer must kill himself, thus the problem is solved faggot
>>902238
Keep it on C
>>904229
why did you bring race into it?
>>904353
yeah, its the best chose. id rather not risk saving 1 life and killing 8, just to not kill 4 people.
>>902124
the trolley could be moving right to left, eh?
>>904690
that's not the point silly,
the picture represents Philippa Foot's Trolley thought experiment, where you're going from five to one.
but your version makes you evil if you do it, but what if you don't know what the leaver does?
so, you don't know if the track is already going to kill one or five, you could do nothing or something saving lives or causing deaths.
una vela
>>902493
man I want to see a train do a loop de loop now :(
>>902124
>pull, kill one person
>don't pull, consent with the killing of 5 people just so you don't feel bad with directly causing the death of one person even though you are directly killing 5
sometimes you have to make small sacrifices for greater causes. it's called duty.
>>904996
>indirectly killing 5
fixed
>>902124
It depends on the quality of the people in said scenario
>>902850
for you
>>902590
as refreshing as it is to have one last website where I am still exposed to real discourse and opinions that use "nigger," "faggot," etc. it's still disappointing to that small heart-shaped fedora inside of all us
