The original trolley problem was that of which a trolley was hurtling down a path, certain to kill the 5 in the way. YOU ALONE have the power to switch tracks, where it would only then kill one person. Is this moral? You made a CHOICE to kill this one person to save five. Is this morally worse or not than allowing the NATURALLY course to occur, which is 5 deaths, one life spared.
Below, I will present to you variations of the trolly problem, and invite you retards to debate it.
Variation 1: Trolley chicken. By not pulling, you allow your cart to plow over the middle 5 guys.
If the 2nd guy:
a.) does not pull the lever, the trolleys hit each other, and there are 5 net deaths, and 6 lives saved.
b.) does pull the lever, his trolley veers off and kills the two above, but YOUR trolley plows him over as well, so there are now 7 total deaths.
If you pull, you also run the risk of him not pulling, and thus killing you as well as 6 others.
well?
>>73614757
I want to maximize death so let the trolley go through the middle and hope the other guy does the same
also, I value my life more than probably everyone elses combined so I wouldnt mind sacrificing a couple people unknown to me to save myself
>>73614757
We assume the above track is a normal, white cis male.
How many cows would have to fit in 'n' for you to justify killing the one human?
Now substitute cows for:
a.feminists
b.niggers
c.muslims
d.jews
e.gypsies
How many lives is the one white guy worth?
>>73614757
self preservation is not only a right but a virtue
If I am in danger I will opt to allow the others to die without risking my own life.
>>73614889
Donald Trump is on the above track
Assuming 5 normal citizens (drawn at random like a draft), do you pull the lever?
If not, how many normies would it take for you to sacrifice the God Emperor?
>>73614939
you are just the guy pulling the lever. You have no personal stake in this.
>>73614889
white cis male is not enough information
the average white cis male is a stupid loser
as a Swiss I have to say that 1 cow is more important than 1 white cis male
a. infinite feminists
b. infinite niggers
c. infinite muslims
d. 0 jews
e. infinite gypsies
Both Pull the lever.
>>73614992
Read picture.
Now assume that both tracks are niggers. Is the other person A SJW, and thus will refuse to pull, so you should to maximize nigger deaths? Or do you go for the 100 nigger kill?
>>73614992
about 100 thousand
quality over quantity
>>73615054
It's supposed to be vague to a point.
Now you have two trolleys. One will kill x/min, and one kills 2x/min, but both indefinitely forever. Does it matter at all?
>>73614757
I remember back in the 50s and 60s the Rand Corporation did a version of this experiment on employees working there. The rational answer is to send the trolley down the middle because you won't die that way, but nobody ever picked the rational answer. Every single person they subjected the thought experiment to picked the answer that relied on everybody being good, the least rational answer there was.
That's how people work: we're totally irrational but we like to think we're rational.
>>73615080
The problem is that YOU can only make YOUR decision. Imagine you are ONE of these guys. Would you pull it, thus risking the OTHER guy sending the trolley up your asshole?
>>73615096
SJW is too beta to do anything but pull it anyway. 0 deaths is nice. not every nigger is bad
>>73614875
>I value my life more than probably everyone elses combined so I wouldnt mind sacrificing a couple people unknown to me to save myself
/thread
How good a shot are you? Good enough to risk it?
>>73615207
yeah of course it matters
one kills twice as fast as the other
>>73615235
How is that not rational?
>>73615418
I would aim for the closer one because I have never shot before and don't know how accurate I am
You're the first guy. Do you kill the 5 and get it over with? If you don't, are you responsible for the 2nd guy not pulling, and killing 5 more, for a total of 6?
Do you trust your other pullers?
how about this one?
>>73615532
5
too many idiots on this world. the optimum would be 4 but it would be risky
>>73615683
do nothing because doing something makes no difference in average
>>73615693
note filename. There is a principle of 'minimax' where a truly utilitarian view minimizes the maximum. You have 100% control over the situation, and can assure the 2nd best outcome (5 deaths) out of a possible 9 outcomes. There are 6 worse outcomes should you pull it, and only one possible better outcome should you have not (everyone pulls it)
>>73615746
Same as above, you avoid the 9 at all costs.
>>73615683
10/10
even if both of us understand each other and pull the lever, it is still going to be just 1 person. not worth risking my life over it.
now it gets complicated
A trolley goes into a Trolley Divisor (TD1), which has 50% of chance to transmit the trolley and 50% of chance of reflecting it, so it has 50% of chance of going each path. In each path, there is a mirror (M1 or M2) which reflects the trolley, adding a phase of π/2 to the trolley. If you do nothing, it has a 50/50 chance of killing 5 people or 1 person. If you pull the lever, you add a second Trolley Divisor in the system. If the trolley is a wave, it has 100% of chance of running over 1 person because of the phase added to the trolley wave. But if the trolley is a particle, you now have a 50/50 chance of being responsible for the death of 1 or 5 people. Is there a trolley particle/wave duality? Would you bet on it? Would you pull the lever?
I really thought this thread would get more replies
>>73616114
I know mach zehnder from pic related but I dont see how it would work in your pic, waves dont work like that
>>73615013
>However should you pull and the other one does nothing, his trolley will not only kill five people, but will also run over you
behind door #1 there are either two goats, or nothing. you do not know the likelihood.
behind door #2 there is a goat
behind door #3 there are either two goats, or nothing. there is a 50% chance of there being two goats.
pulling the lever has a 50% chance of directing the trolley to #1 and a 50% chance of directing the trolley to #3.
would you pull the lever to save the goat, possibly killing two goats?
also if you manage to kill less than two goats you win whatever is behind door #4. there is a 25% chance there is a car behind door #4. this likelihood is increased to 75% if you pull the lever.
>>73614757
>le prisoners dilemma
>MUH GAME THEORY XD
>>73614757
anyone like Trilemmas?
>pick 2
>>73614757
Numbers have nothing to do with goodness. The whole situation is a non-problem.
>>73614757
Game theory.
Don't do shit and go home 3/5 times.
>>73614757
I recently cleared out my phone so I lack the picture
but
"ACTUALLY THE MORAL THING IS TO KILL THE LEAST, BY NOT INTERVENING I AM KILLING NO ONE
jesus christ dude just pull the lever"
>>73615235
The problem with the experiment is the act of being observed causes people to pick the "good" answer. In reality most people will choose to save their own life especially if it's THEM vs STRANGERS. In reality, most people choose to look the other way when crime happens to someone else because they don't want to get hurt or die.
The other problem with the trolley problem is it's so absurdly hypothetical that people disassociate themselves from the scenario.
>>73615418
The second target.
I can hit a ping-pong ball at 50 yards without a scope. This target should be easy.
>>73615418
with no sights the thing is useless
point at head
>>73615832
happiness wells
>>73618471
with a handgun? impressive.
>>73615420
>twice
swiss mathematicians, everyone
>>73615096
>>73615207
>>73614757
Well, first we have to examen your claims of a natural state. I believe not pulling the lever is as much of a choice as pulling it and makes you just as responsible for the effects from it. So what remains is wether it is ethically more defensible to kill 1 or 5 people. The obvious answer would be yes, but that assumes the value of a human life can be described as a real, positive, number. If that were the case, 5 times the value of a human life is obviously worth more than one human life. But if we get rid of that assumption, there are new ways to consider the problem. I would say the worth of a human life is infinite. When multiplying infinity with a natural number like 5, you get the same infinity. Not even a different cardinality. Under this concept, both choices are actually morally equivalent. Same goes obviously for zero as the value of human life.
>>73617859
the consequence of the 1/5 time resulting in your death is far more serious.
>>73615418
Shoot myself so I score maximum kills
>>73617859
5/5 actually
the trolley will always be a meat shield
>>73615207
Maximim dindus hit is my answer, lets just draw this one along racial lines.
>>73618727
Human life is not worth "infinity". You can easily apply math to any human being's life to determine the relative value of their contribution to society. A person does not generate infinite value because time and efficiency is not infinite. A retard is not as valuable as someone who owns and runs a farm that feeds 100 people. Your answer is a feel-good cop out.
>>73614757
By being in your position you are at fault either way so you should make the decision that saves more lives. Location Matters.
>>73617812
less death = good
even a band of monkeys can figure that out.
>>73615207
lim(kills[i](t))(t->inf) = inf
pull lever a little, so the train goes off the rails, and drifts across both tracks for style points.
>>73614757
Create a Virus that kills all but a few purest people on the planet and spread it in the air to kill 98% of the globe
>>73614757
I don't pull either and go take out the guy who is tying all these people up
>>73615207
>Implying it matters if they live or die if they are chained to the tracks for all eternity.
>>73619142
That's not the case. There's nothing bad about death.
>>73619123
The value of human life being based on the relative contributions to society is just another arbitrary assumption, with no more backing than infinity or zero.
>>73619242
>There's nothing bad about death.
False
>>73615418
Shoot the guy on the other track.
That's quite a good variation I like it. Probably don't pull just incase.
>>73619317
Not false. You can believe death is bad all you want - it won't make it true.
>>73619125
Being in that position implies an external force that put you there and created the scenario for your to have a conundrum over since the premise gives you perfect knowledge of the situation (ie a "Saw" scenario). This means any action you take really wasn't your choice to begin with.
>>73619313
Except that is a lie. You could tally up every deed someone did in life and compare it to someone else and determine who did better. Again, you're just being a faggot because accountability is a concept that scares you.
>>73619457
Self-Preservation is hardwired into all living things.
Death is a bad outcome for any living object.
Thinking otherwise just betrays a cognitive error.
A broken brain cannot comprehend moral questions.
>>73619763
Naturalistic fallacy.
>>73614757
Pull the lever and get the fuck off the track?
>>73614757
i am way too high for this.
>>73619741
>ally up every deed someone did in life and compare it to someone else and determine who did better
only true if the goodness of a deed is something that can be measured
>>73619822
>naturalistic fallacy
only applies to normative ethics.
try again.
Death is objectively determined to make a member of species unfit for survival.
whatever the scenario i dont pull the lever because then id have criminal involvment
>>73619763
This only works for yourself
I'd only pull the lever if the extra guy would kill me otherwise
>>73619313
>>73619741
It's true though. the value of a human life is relative. That's why I base it on the relation I have to this human being.
>>73619911
>accountability is scary
>everything people does is equal
>there is no right or wrong
>there is no such thing as value
>me playing video games is the same as running a business and keeping people paid and fed
>>73619594
Yes it is. You always have choice even when the choices are shitty. You can be forgiven but it was still your choice. Doing nothing is a choice. You are always responsible for your choices. Context matters when deciding on how much you should be blamed but whether or not people decide to let it slide you still made the decision and the events that happened are on you when you are posted at a point that gives you a chance to affect things.
>>73620204
Relative value is for cowards afraid to get judged. But don't worry, everyone knows you're a piece of shit loser.
>>73620190
thats also wrong.
moral absolutism is illogical and actually abdicates moral reasoning..
>>73620088
You subjectively value surviving. It's incredibly obviously not an objective hard-wired value, since people kill themselves constantly and value dying over living.
The naturalistic fallacy applies to *all* reasoning that states "this is [value] because it is natural". Which is exactly the reasoning you're using - death is bad because it is (more natural than not) to disvalue death. Fucking pathetic logic.
>both pull the lever
>4 die
>1 pulls the lever
>8 die (plus you/other guy)
>both do nothing
>5 die with no risk of you dying
I'd do nothing. Pulling the lever not only risks myself, but even more people than not. The best situation would result in 4 dead, and by pulling the lever I endanger double that. 5 dead, it is what it is.
>>73620244
I never said that there are no good or bad deeds, only that the goodness of a deed can't be accurately determined, which means it's often impossible to accurately judge one person as being better than another.
Not to mention that one person might have done more good deeds only because he had the luck to come across more opportunities to do so. The other person might have been every bit as willing to do the good deeds that the first one did, but because they weren't given a chance to do so, the goodness of their character will ever be known to the world.
>>73620312
If you assume that the value of a human life is absolute it leads to numerous problems
For example:
Why should a retarded child with no real consciousness have the same value as a highly intelligent, healthy child? What about a human body without a working brain or a fetus?
It also poses the question how you define "human". There is no reason to believe that human beings are qualitatively better than higher animals. Why is it that the value of a human life is infinite and value of a chimpanzee almost nonexistent? It implies that there is a fixed border between human and nonhuman.
>>73620375
>people kill themselves constantly and value dying over living.
There broken. The exception doesn't make the rule.
Self-preservation is deontological for the fitness of a person.
You want to make the claim that a successful feature for preserving life is no more than a naturalistic fallacy then you don understand what the fallacy means.
Life is valued by humans because we are objectively, and neurologically and behaviorally verifiable, default to self-preservation which is the basis for empathy and reciprocity.
>You subjectively value surviving.
These feelings are subjectively valued by people because:
1. subjective valuation is the only valuation possible
2. and all normative people are programmed that way.
This creates an objective standard that we can apply to our unique subjective viewpoint on ethics.
What you are arguing is meta-ethics. Which is nothing more than sophmoric verbal masterbation. You arguing that
>"right" is just a word man
becuz your a pathetic misanthrop doesn't accomplish mush in developing your emotional intelligence.
You probably an autist and don't have any clue what empathy means.
>>73620853
Underrated post of the century
>>73621212
It's an old meme
>>73621145
>they're broken
By your subjective standard of valuation. Fitness is a subjective value. Success is subjectively determined and valued.
>2. and all normative people are programmed that way
Something being more common than not - such as humans valuing living over dying - and objective standard does not make you illogical moron.
You don't have a single leg to stand on. Give up.
>>73620832
>3 trains
>5 levers
>that tied up guy next to the lever
>that lever dick with the controller smiling
What the fuck is going on here?
Well /pol/?
>>73614889
all of them.
>>73621486
>Fitness
>success
subjectively valued by 99.9% of living things.
>and objective standard does not make you illogical moron.
dont what ur babbling about here.
We cant know for sure, but humans have had plenty of practice knowing how to spot broken persons, they hamper group fitness.
Separating the wheat from the chaff is how fitness improves.
>>73622000
>argumentum ad populum
Kill yourself.
>>73619158
M-MULTITRACK DRIFTING?!
>>73622110
>fallacy fallacy
babby first argument
>>73622178
When someone literally and unironically uses fallacious reasoning - like trying to say that because most people x, x is objectively valuable (LAMO) - it's an actual fallacy you illogical moron. Stay wrong and stupid for the rest of your life; it gives the rest of us something to laugh at.
>>73622178
>>fallacy fallacy
pointing out that an argument is fallacious isn't a fallacy fallacy you nigger
>>73622178
>my argument is flawed
>better spout memes
>>73619125
If you pull it you are killer and belong to death row.
>>73622110
>ad populum
pretty much where all ethical standards derive from?
where do you think they come from?
the sky?!
>>73619142
so split your kinds for organs
>>73620853
Woke up just to "This" this
>>73622500
God. But you're in all likelihood a scientism nigger-lover. So enjoy your completely pathetic attempts at trying to establish a substantive ethical framework for the remainder of your gaytheism.
>>73622475
You're a killer either way. Your sense of justice is flawed and you would place heavy blame on someone who was put into a tough spot.
>>73620088
A human paperclipper, his autism demonstrates how it's possible to be an intelligent fool.
>>73622415
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
>implications
>objectively valuable
never that either
u cant even read.
>>73622458
>>73622467
>>73622415
ITT
brainlets that think arguing from fallacy proves your point or that the speaker is wrong.
Try college someday.
Try actual crafting argument.
>>73622653
>God fallacy
>agumentum ad dio
>circular logic
>confirmation bias
sorry nigga
thought u were for real
lel
>he believes in ghosts
>he talks to his own farts
>>73622500
a system of morality which is derived from the voice of the masses will almost always be shit you ape.
actually good systems of morality come from from logic and philosophy.
>>73622763
>never that either
L A M O
A
M
O
>>73621145
>This creates an objective standard that we can apply to our unique subjective viewpoint on ethics
>>73619763
>Death is a bad outcome for any living object
>>73622929
>a system of morality which is derived from the voice of the masses
>voice
its in their ape brain, dummy.
dont they teach evolution in the escuela
its done humans breddy gud for 200,000 years.
we keep on truckin
>>73622971
>L A M O
>>73618727
> I believe not pulling the lever is as much of a choice as pulling it and makes you just as responsible for the effects from it.
you believe is wrong then.
by your twisted moral standard, you could be blamed for guy in third word country who dies of hunger cos you did not choose to go and feed him and rather sit at computer.
You may say there is something to it but it is not equal to killing someone.
Not saving someone life if not murder
>>73622895
>he gets assfucked by logic
L
A
M
O
>>73622763
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
>Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false.[1] It is also called argument to logic (argumentum ad logicam), fallacy fallacy,[2] fallacist's fallacy,[3] and bad reasons fallacy.[4]
pointing out a fallacy isn't the same as a fallacy fallacy you illiterate cunt
>>73621791
jump down, smash their head until they die, untie them and move them out of the track.
>>73623071
That's the point.
>>73622971
>objectively valued
>objective standard
>bad outcome
geee golly, those morphemes dont seem to match professor autismo
did u post anime and grab a bunch of random quotes that dont support your assertion?
you kidder, you
>>73623118
>god =\= logic
>god = stupid
parse that
>>73614757
Walk away.
>>73623133
>ad hominen
>ad fallactio
>is-ought fallacy
>nay saying
>>73615418
Let it continue and shoot the other.
The only answer for every one of these is to not do anything
Because you would be charged and sued to oblivion for the 1 death even if it saved 100 people
The only reason to ever divert would be to save yourself or friends/family in which case fuck everyone else no matter how many die
>>73621791
Solution, untie the niggers and kill them
>>73623439
Or you could just elect a muslim Mayor, that would solve everything
>>73614875
But anon
If you choose for yours to move and he doesn't
8 people will die
Wouldn't that be great?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes#Dichotomy_paradox
The carts will never reach the people. Problem solved.
>>73614992
There could be miles and miles of people tied up shoulder to shoulder on those tracks, I'd still save the Trumpster.
>>73623263
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Unless you're trying to tell me "Death is a bad outcome for *ANY LIVING OBJECT*" is *MAGICALLY* not trying to instantiate death as an objective value given *IT APPLIES TO ANY LIVING OBJECT*, or that you saying there's an *OBJECTIVE* standard to something isn't to be taken as valuable by everyone, you're fucking comedy GOLD m8!
L
A
M
O
!
Deontology says don't pull the lever because then you are the cause of someone's death and that would be immoral.
Utilitarianism says pull the lever because saving 5 lives is better than saving 1 life.
Virtue ethics just says that whatever choice you make it will reveal something essential about your character, and this can be good or bad.
I'm not actually sure which of those I subscribe to tbqh.
>>73623318
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!
FOR FUCKS SAKE JUST BAN TROLLEYS ALREADY
>>73623653
Would doing nothing about the situation make you responsible?
Or: If you choose not to save a drowning man are you responsible for his death?
>>73614757
In the name of self preservation im not pulling that switch.
Fuck that other guy. Hopefully he thinks the same thing and we both survive but.. like i said. Fuck that guy.
>>73623644
dont you believe in magic?
im sorry but i dont discuss philosophy with people who think rabbits disappear into hats. nope sorry.
>>73623739
tell us about Sir Isaac Newtons world renowned treatises on religious subjects.
>>73622763
pic LOL
>>73623915
You *LITERALLY AND UNIRONICALLY* utilize *VICIOUSLY CIRCULAR REASONING* in *EVERYTHING YOU DO*, and *I'M* the one who believes in magic?
AHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
>>73624011
>he unironically believes in a hebrew sky wizard who makes rules for humanity
>>73623786
Yes. Deontology is retarded.
>>73623786
No, but helping someone is different from causing someone's death though.
If you pull the lever and save the 5 lives, you are directly responsible for the death of 1 person, because the death of that person is directly causally linked to your pulling of the lever.
Doing nothing at all, is my reflexive choice tbqh, because I don't want to be the judge between who gets to live and who dies, and I don't think it's anyone's job unless it's in self-defense.
>>73624126
P R O B L E M
O F
I N D U C T I O N
L A M O
A
M
O
>>73624126
>i̢͎̦̗̲̖͕̗̘̓͗͛̿̎̓̓̌ͥ̏ͣ̇́͘͠m̨̢̛͔̥̭͈͓̱̲̍̆̽̿ͬ̽̎̋ͭ̾͌̈̈́͌̚͡͠p̶̡̢̛͉͈͔̱͉͔̬̯̲̮̖̄̔͑ͪ͛͑̆̌ͤ͑̎ͮͤͩ́̎͝l̝̤̰̰̹̅̇̈́ͯ́͠͝͠y̖̺̲̳̲̟̯̲͚̝̖͉̱̱͍̱̗̲̠̔͒̍̈́ͬ̑ͩͪ͗̎͘͡i͊ͥͩ͂̒̌̓͗͒̇̌͂ͨ̃̄ͫ̾̔ͬ͏̱̪̥͇̭̬̗̪̹n̡̨͎̤̳͖͕͇̭͚̥͉͕͇̯̹͉͙̠̝ͮͥ̿̋̓ͬg̨̙̘̣̱͓̹̙̙̗͔͉͇̣͕̍́͋ͦ͊ͭͧ̈̊̄ ̶̫̩̪̩͙͈͙͔͕͔͖͙ͬ͛̈́̈͗̋̓̓̽͑̽̀̊̈́̋̔́́͘͜ţ̷̑ͧ͂ͪ́͌͗̄̆̎̊͘҉̨͇̻̼̦̼͕̩ḧ̶͓͓͉̭́̉͐̊ͨͨ̓̅̍͌̆̋̒͘ȧ̡̢̜̬̞͖̥̹̫̳̞̙̤͈̠̞͔̤̑ͥͤ̏͑ͨ̽ͨ̒ͮ͡t̟̻͔̬́̊̓ͦ̑ͬ͂ͫ̈̋̒̆̃́͝ ̵̌ͥͥ͋̄̈̽̔ͬͩ̈҉̯̠͉͕̣͉̺̲̩̠͍͈̼̥͎̺̜iͧͧͧ̌ͥ̊̀ͣͨ̾́́̚͏̢̭̼̩͓͙͇̪̯̻͎̱͕͙̻̤s̡̡͈̳̙̙̺̩̮͙̝̬̲̗̰̊̓̽͒ͪ̊ͬ̄̋ͮ͑ͨ̚͜͜n̖̻̝̼̤̗̻͎̞̱͈ͭ̓ͣ̔ͧ́̕͜'͆̃̎͆͒̓̋҉̩̲͍̺̣͖̤͡t̸̢̼̜͕̝ͤͮͭ͐ͤ̎͘ ͣͨͥͫ̈́̈̈̄͏̶̡҉̤̦̰͇̱͚̙͞ḥ̹̮̤̖͈̗̺̙̰̘̺̲̮̩̘̫̈̂͆ͦ͗̎͋̈́̏̋ͤ́͘͘͢͠ỏ́̓ͭ҉̸̛̘̖͚̖̱͍͔̗̦̯̪̗̘͞ẇ̟̟̲͉͓ͣ͊̎ͭͩ͒̂ͩ̐ͪ̃̈̄̏͐̿́̈́̕̕͜ ̡̬̦̭̯̲̣̭̫̦̯̹̪̻́̑̒̾̄̿͒̒̈̑ͭ̂̀ͅt̸̅͐̉̑͌̈̊ͯ̎ͤ́͜͏҉̼͔̻͈̗̦̩̠ḫ̨̭͕̫͚̮̣̩̦̼̫̝͑̒̾͞e̶̞̲̣͔͙̠̖̰̣͚ͮͥ̏̃̿ͫ͑̿̽̽̽͂̌ ̡̅̔̋ͨ̊̊̎́ͪ͗̂ͫͣ̏̚̕͏͇̠̫̠͖̩͢ẘ̛̳̝̻͓͚̙̘̥̻̠̩̝͙̟̯̻̱͌̊̿ͨ̿͒͘͠ő̴̰̼̥͉͇̯͇̖̲̤̋́ͭͣ̋ͮ̂̓ͥr̷̷̡̛̗̼͇̭̙̩̤̙̼ͪ̄̿ͯ̀̚ļ̬̙̪͍̞̘̝̞̼̣̭̲́͒̂͆̀̈́͛̋͑̾ͣ̈́͌̅͋̀͒ͪ͡ͅd̛̛̩̻̰̬̞͖̬̭ͭ̎ͯͤ̓͗̓̔̚͢ ̵̛̼͈͚͓̎͐̄́͋ͣͣ͘̕w̥̥̖͙̳̪͖̖͍͎̼̮͈͉͛͒ͮ̋̔͗̓ͪͤ̔̇̔̓̀ͪ́̚͟͠ǫ̶̡̼̝͍̦͚̺̣̗̭̞͈̰͖̆ͧ͆ͬ̂̂̌r̢͎̖͓̹̭̖̣͉̯͉̻͖̤̝͓̥̟̫ͮ͑͊͒̓̊ͨͣ̃́̃̕͠k̸̭̬̱̮̹̩̰͖͚͚̹̩ͨͥ̓ͯ̊͒͋ͬ̋̎̑ͯ́͢s̴͚̹͉̣͖͇͓̦̥̼̖̥͙̻͖̟̯̦͐̽̏ͬ̏̕͟͠
>>73624011
>>73623739
>>73623644
>>73623241
>>73623118
>>73622971
>>73622653
>>73622415
>>73622110
>>73621486
>>73620375
>>73619822
>>73619457
>>73619242
What the fuck is this
>>73624245
Philosophical shitposting
>>73624245
sad.. aint it?
honestly i am only in here for the memes
>>73617326
Best odds is do nothing but that isn't exciting enough. If pull it.
>>73624369
Nothing more sad than someone whose entire life is based on viciously circular reasoning~
>>73624245
Tripcodes.
>>73614992
kek'ed so hard. goo job anon
>>73624226
here
i improved it
with my ass
>>73624433
I always come for memes and stay for rage.
>>73614757
If the other person is a nigger, jew, or athiest send it right down the middle
If I have no knowledge of the other person or the potential victims, send it right down the middle. (There are more bad people in the world than good)
It's faulty to judge these things based on the # of lives lost. Some lives are worth more than others. I would gladly sacrifice 5 crack whores to save Albert Einstein. As long as you aren't sacrificing millions or billions, for the most part you can't decide these things based sheerly on numbers. Especially when your own life is at stake (you're important too you know)
Something else you need to consider. If after this incident people learn that you sent the cart down the middle, you might run into some significant social reprisal. From your friends, family, and community. If this social pressure is high enough, you can safely send the cart to the side, knowing that the other person feels the same social pressures and thus will probably do the same
>>73614757
Not pull.
1. It's the GTO utilitarian decision
2. It's self defense (this is the largest factor for me)
3. It's the "natural" path of the trolley (whatever that means)
This variation is stupid.
>>73624516
Brilliant.
Where's the yellow from the banana though?
>>73624548
am too high to rage man, i laughed at
>>73623879
>>73621242
>>73620832
way too hard
>>73624458
>sad
>tripfag
>weebfag
>furfag
no u clearly win here
kek
>>73624741
>incapable of formulating logically consistent arguments
>gaytheist
>can't get around a problem that destroys the very fabric of his own "philosophy" (LAMO)
L A M O
A
M
O
>>73614757
I'd probably pull the lever and go with the utilitarian way.
But what if the people in the middle were niggers and the red guy was right nationalist and the blue guy was a leftard globalist?
>>73624938
>couldnt handle the bantz
>posts little japanese girls
>not rekt
>>73624938
>>73624673
I don't get it, is he ironically shitposting or having a nervous breakdown after he was proved wrong?
>>73625047
you're both fucking losers
>>73625047
>can't argue
>can't banter
>can't shitpost
God man. What *CAN* you do?
>>73625230
take your bait
>>73625127
>proved wrong
It's "proven" by the way.
>>73625230
>tripfags gonna trip
this butthurt over me insulting his gay sky daddy
>>73625357
>gaytheists gonna gay
This butthurt over someone pointing out the reality of his illogical assfuckery.
>>73625127
this JIDF shill >>73625230
>>73624938
>>73625317
got BTFO,
now he's dumping his weeb cartoon folder
also he's a furfag
>>73625497
L A M O
>>73625556
>shills mcshillington
nioice cartoones
u got any sanic?
>>73625556
>>73625473
>>73625317
>>73625230
Is this what having autism feels like?
I came here for trolley memes, not this fuckery.
>>73625686
Run speed fast go quick. Almost as lovely an image as your "ethics".
>>73625757
I know.
He literally draws like a malaysian.
id be embarassed to show my trip around here with those scriblles.
>>73615683
Depends on the relative probabilities. Let A denote the probability of the switch sending the trolley to track A, and B denote likewise for track B. The probability for C is of course just 1, assuming you don't flip. The expectation value for fatalities then is, respectively for whether you choose to flip the switch or don't:
<Flip>=9A+B
<Don't>=5
Since probabilities must add up to 1, we further have that A+B=1, so in terms of A, <Flip becomes.
<Flip=9A+B=9A+1-A=8A+1
The most sensible criteria for whether or not to flip the switch would be to determine when Flipping the switch has a lower expectation of casualties than not. That is, we want
<Flip> < <Don't>
Or, in terms of the probabilities
8A-1<5
Or
A< 3/4
That is, as long as the probability of Track A being chosen on a flip is smaller than 75%, it is better to flip the switch.
>>73625872
i fucking knew it.
THATS IT
PACK IT UP BOYS!
HES A POOFTER AFTERALL!
>>73614875
>I value my life more than probably everyone elses combined so I wouldnt mind sacrificing a couple people unknown to me to save myself
This right here.
>>73625861
always happens in trolley threads, but this new tripfag really takes the cake.
>>73626039
i had to check his flag twice to ensure it wasn't canadian
>>73626039
>>73626132
I'm sure what the fuck is happening but I came here for some keks and trolley post. Where the fuck are the trolley post?
>>73618967
I drink from time to time and make poor decisions then..
>>73625998
L O M O
Give me more of your ethics. It's even better than your furiously homoerotic images men.
>>73626270
>Praceteom
Was just on 4plebs
reading your epicbuttblasting in a catholic thread/
lol
dont you know works alone makes your faith an anti-social cult.
makes sense
>furfag
>weeb
>protestant
>>73625876
Took me a few seconds to figure that one out
I fucking hate algebra
>>73626500
>me
>protestants
>arguing for salvation by works
L M A O
Do you even know what I *do* in Catholic threads?
How many images of adult men do you have, exactly?
>>73626663
i bet ur a virgin and have 280 lbs of fat.
>>73626663
>>73626270
>>73625872
>People still falling for his poor bait
>>73626741
>increasingly terrible banter
Do the bananas also affect your brain?
>>73625876
Fucking hell, I fucked up.
It SHOULD be
A<1/2
I am the dumb.
>>73627014
TBQH, I think most people here are too dense to even notice that
I knew something was wrong there somewhere, but I couldn't put my finger on it
Anyways, roll
Answer to all of these: do nothing so you can't be held responsible.
>>73627254
rolling.
>>73621095
We already know of these problems. As much as i am a human rights activist, retards are retards and do make our gene pool worse. That being said i don't have a problem with their existence, as long as they don't have more than 1 child.
Honestly we need to start regulating human birth. It sounds evil but in a world where we are very much at our maximum capacity, we will face a problem if we continue letting people breed like rabbits.
Sure you could argue how inhumane it is, but at the same time how inhumane is it to overpopulate the earth and cause generations to starve and fight wars for resources?
This is why we need to regulate birth and the gene pool. We are humans are built for survival of the fittest, or in simplest terms to fuck everything we lay our eyes on to spread our genes. However when we stop nature from weeding out weak genes, or nothing stops a man from living to 50 years and fucking everything he wants, we face the problems we face in the modern day with weaker humans at ridiculous birth rates.
One of the few saving graces we have is abortions, as evil as i see them, they are very needed.
I know you weren't arguing for or against birth rights, but at the same time it is very true some humans are better than others. Its not a nice truth, but at the same time its one we all realize.
That being said we don't have to treat each other like shit just because of a lottery at birth. Just have to stop the worst of society from filling the world with their worse genes.
And no i am not for nazi like concentration camps, just at least a limit on children people can have, that way the best men will find the best women as women and men will know they can only have one shot.
>>73628499
Who gets to determine who gets to fuck and have kids and who doesn't? And how could you possibly enforce that?
Someone could have a beef with *you*, and prevent *you* from having a kid by some means under the guise of whatever criteria you may subjectively impose on others.
>>73614889
>save one white guy and kill femshits/nignogs/slimes/heebs/gypsies, or kill white guy and save the degenerates
You're in /pol/, you know what the answer is.
>How many lives is the one white guy worth?
One white guy > all degenerates
>>73614992
>Donald Trump is on the above track
Save the God-Emperor, fuck everyone else
>b-but I'm not done describ...
SAVE. THE. GOD. EMPEROR.
>>73615418
This is a good one. let the trolley run over the 5 people then go shoot the 6th in the head. No one is going to stop my cowboy bank robbery today
>>73615832
>note filename. There is a principle of 'minimax' where a truly utilitarian view minimizes the maximum.
Did you factor in the quality of the people, or the time involved? Say in the minimax2 pic, those in track A are all unskilled criminals, while those in track C are useful (scientists, doctors, etc) and law-abiding people. Killing the 9 criminals in track A would be the most optimum choice, because they're useless human beings, in a utilitarian point of view.
At best, the 9 unskilled criminals would only be good for digging ditches, and that could easily be replaced by machinery.
The loss of the 5 useful and law-abiding people would be sorely missed.
If given enough time, you have to find out the quality of people, because few quality people is always better than a lot of useless ones.
If there's very little time, you use your own judgment to quickly 'assess' the value/quality of people and make your decisions accordingly.
If there's no time to assess, then you go for quantity.
>>73614757
implying the lever will change anything
>>73614889
>cows
don't care, kill the cows
>feminists
don't care
>niggers
don't care
>muslims
don't care
>jews
maybe 20? depends on if there any qt cocksuckers
>gypsies
don't care
>>73615207
doesn't matter
>>73615418
shoot at the closer one
>>73615532
ignore
>>73615683
ignore
>>73616114
ignore, so long as I'm not at risk
>>73617326
they're fucking goats dude
>>73621791
gas the kikes, send the niggers back to africa
>>73623164
push the fat man onto mr A after he pulls the lever to save mrs A. Walk down and rape Mrs A, provided she's kinda hot, or strangle her if she's not
Is there anything in life that isn't a trolley problem?
