>game forces you to make a moral choice
>>335969759
>Game forces you to make a moral choice
>NPCs berate you for making the "wrong" one and force you into following the "right" option regardless of your choice
>>335969759
>Quick save
>Go with 75% everytime
>>335969759
>train hits the first 75% guy
>it flies off the tracks as it can't cut through the meatbag on the rails
>everybody else is saved
Checkmate faggot
>>335969910
>pick 1 thing
>everyone hates you for picking that one thing
>start new save and pick other thing
>everyone hates you for picking that one thing
This would be fine if any video game ever created actually had an interesting moral choice.
Instead it's always a variation of the BioShock dilemma: Be evil and get an immediate reward, or be good and get a reward later (which turns out to be objectively better than the reward for being evil so there's literally no reason to be evil except to get the alternate ending).
>game presents a choice
>pick the obviously better but morally wrong option
>it was a ruse, you get laughed at, everyone likes you a lot less now
>>335969759
Assuming that any damage would kill them, .75^5 > .15, therefore running over 5 has a higher chance of saving everyone. However, the expected value of people died going in their track is 1.6 versus .15. Therefore, switching to the single man's track is far better.
>>335970096
>implying it doesn't just phase through him without inflicting damage like an I frame in a fighting game
>>335969759
>game forces you to make a moral choice.
>the choice that sounded more logical and like a better outcome for everyone in the long run is seen as "evil" by the one dimensional morality of the devs
>you get "evil points" for choosing something you thought would help the most
>moral
>>335969963
probably save more time if you went for the 15% every time
>>335970342
Actually I fucked that up by mixing the probabilities. The actual expected value of the many people track is .151 versus .15, almost identical. So really not much difference in expected value.
>>335970342
Balance patch to make arbitrary choice more morally ambiguous
>Game lets you spare a would-be child-killer and, later on, an emotionless psychopath
>Sparing them is considered the moral choice, no backlash whatsoever
>>335970342
>>335970342
Switching to the single track directly holds you responsible for a death. Running over five people without intervention is the morally right action.
>>335970312
what gaem?
>>335970567
Since the expected values are almost the same and keeping it on the many people track has a higher chance of saving everyone, I think that would be the correct option anyway.
>>335970578
pull the level, always
>>335970501
You're still risking significantly more by going the five people, since a bad RNG will kill more than just the one person.
>>335970536
Now it's just obvious, the one person has less to risk and the odds aren't bad.
>>335970447
Someone please give me context.
I don't know how a title as famous as the Witcher would be able to get away with such a thing.
>>335970567
Isn't inaction in a situation when you could've prevented a death morally wrong as well?
>>335970709
>Guy running down the train tracks towards the two trains
>There's a train at the lever
What? /lit/ can be funny sometimes?
>>335970898
The baby was a straight white male.
Letting it live was the "renegade" choice.
>>335970736
Probability is probability. Regardless of the track, you're expected to kill the same number of people and you have a higher chance of zero deaths staying on the many people track. An 85% chance to kill 1 person versus 25% per person 5 times shouldn't be a question. For that probability to be equal, each person would need a 68% chance of negating all damage. So it's not far off.
>>335970223
The first Mass Effect had a decent idea. The choice isn't between good and bad, but between decisive and diplomatic.
For example with the Rachni queen, logically killing it would be the best way to go because it's one life versus potentially millions, but morally you want to believe everyone deserves a second chance.
Of course it didn't matter and ultimately amounted to nothing but it had potential.
>>335970536
>RNG still kills anyone in the way every time.
>>335969759
Always go with the sick loop de loop
>>335969759
>Possibilities of 1 person dying if you switch = 85%
>Possibilities of 1 person dying if you don't (and the train goes over the 4 with 75% chance to resist) = 42%
>>335970709
more trolley memes pls
>vr sexbot forces you to start doing something with your life
>>335971093
I got u
>>335971003
Morally, it's all up to the morals. Society would say that if you did nothing, then you are not at fault for anything that happens, alternatively, if you flipped the switch, you MAY have saved 5 lives, but you were also directly responsible for killing someone.
The moral choice here is all about selfish defense, where most of the arguments made for ignoring this situation altogether is because getting involved means that you're killing someone, instead of passively doing nothing.
>>335969759
Does the train do one sweeping attack or are there several attacls hidden inside its body, ie each wheel gets an attack per body?
If anything more than one rolling attack, 15%.
>>335970192
well if you want realism, there you have it
>>335970192
>VLR
>>335971140
well gee i can easily disregard six lives if i can just witness that loop.
>>335970328
>>335971069
Actually I have to correct my statement
the possibility of AT LEAST 1 death if you let the train go over the 4 people is 68.40%. Still better than the 85% of the other one
The only logical choice is to let the train go over the 4 dudes
>>335971160
Would pulling the level eventually become the correct choice if you increased the amt. of peeps saved, like to 50, or 500? Or would it still be wrong?
>Game forces you to make a moral choices
>all but one of the choices end up in game over
>>335971306
>>335971467
That's the thing, it's not really WRONG, but Society gets to blame you for the death of the single person if the person who set this up was never found- or even if they were found, the 1 persons' family might blame you.
It's not about morals, it's about selfishness. Anyone who ACTUALLY cares about morals will flip the switch (Granted more info isn't injected into the situation, like who the 5 or 1 person is) regardless of facing the music. The only reason people would ever not flip the switch is if they were being ironic, or being selfish.
>>335971620
>MGSV
>Can't kill the children even though it's the MISSION OBJECTIVE
>They end up fucking you up royally.
They deserved it, those fucks.
>>335971346
5 guys so 76.3% at least 1 dies, but I agree
Which of the tracks gets me a goat and which gets me a new car?
>>335971030
>thinking the witcher follows Biowares gay-ass black and white moral code
Yeh right boi
>>335969759
i don't get it is my goal to save them or try to guarantee a few kills?
>Game has morals
>They are all based on consequentialist ethics
Wooow
>>335972116
well if you get a killstreak you get another trolley
>>335970898
It's a bamboozle to intimidate player
>>335972154
If you send the bonus trolley at the other track, does that give you the 100% Clear bonus for the level, or is there something else I'm missing?
>>335971982
Kek
>sacrifice one character to save another
>both die cannonicly
Telltale games in a nutshell
>>335971620
>I came here to defeat the last Matoran.
>You must be tired from your voyage. I will ask again.
>>335972286
yeah if you get the kill then you get 5 star completion bonus and 10 coins to spend
>>335972394
Sweet. With the 10 coins from this level, I'm only 5 away from upgrading the trolley damage.
>>335970898
The one eyed guy is a jarl inflicted with a parasitic demon that feeds off of guilt. One of the characters your helping tricks you into throwing the baby in the oven. The demon then tries to body jump seeing a better meal in the witcher who now believes he's a baby killer.
>>335971030
actually laughed
>being so sheltered that moral quandaries being thrust upon you triggers you harder than a SJW tumblerphile.
>>335972145
The brain should pull the lever halfway.
>>335972691
A pull is a Pull, there's no half pull.
>>335972691
A lever pull is a lever pull, you can't say it's only half.
>>335971916
Well picking the right ship is easy because the steering wheel is the soul, so wooden wheel ship is Theseus's
So shoot that one at the trolley, and the other ship can shoot the turtle
>>335972340
>Try very hard to save the potato
>The potato dies anyway
Fucking game.
>>335972691
>Not standing on the opposite side and giving the lever a half push instead of pulling at all.
>>335972914
>>335973003
A pull is technically two parts, the initial pull and then the release. If you approach the tracks with the lever already pulled, and you don't let go of the lever until the end, then it totally counts as a half pull.
>>335970536
>>335970736
>>335971031
Is that 75% chance not to take any damage or to negate all damage?
Because if it's the latter then each person has a 75% chance of stopping the train entirely.
Tough choices in video games will ready you for tough choices in real life.
>>335969759
Top has a 15% expected value, bottom has a 24% expected value. Go with the bottom.
>>335969759
you should choose the 75, statisticly
>>335973149
>>335971306
underrated post
>>335973210
I read it as not take any damage, so they would independently be checked for damage.
>>335969759
i don't choose because then i'll have intervened and i might get in trouble
>>335969759
I wait a few months for the third campaign to come out where I don't pick either side and remain independent.
>>335973210
In what fucking world would the train be stopped?
Then again there's a similar moral problem with pushing a fat guy, and I doubt he's heavier than 5 people... so, maybe?
Wait. I thought I was on /v/
none of this is abut video games
WHERE AM I?!
>>335971306
>>335973458
It's actually the best plan, just wait until it's partially past the switch. The train would come to a halt if not detail.
>>335973659
That'll be an extra $20.And it'll be the worst out of all three routes in both story AND gameplay.
>>335973740
You are in the apex of civilization. This is where learned minds come to discuss matters of probability and ethics because video games are shit and will never get better.
>>335973771
So of I pick one and it breaks the other levers he can't make my chances better by showing one that doesn't work.
>>335974049
Wouldn't pulling a lever and deciding on a lever be different things? On the show, you had to pick a door before you could open a door.
>>335974049
You announce your pick, he reveals a goat lever
Pull /that/ goat lever and enjoy the loop
>>335974338
But it specifically says Monty Hall will let you switch to the non-revealed lever. If you can't overpower Monty Hall, that won't work.
>>335974338
How can I trust a sick fuck who ties people to tracks about whether it's a goat lever?
>>335974581
>If you can't overpower Monty Hall, you get added to the track and the next contestant gets to choose a lever.
ftfy
>>335974581
>If you can't overpower Monty Hall
I've got a 66% chance to do that, pretty good
>>335973236
Go back to /pol/ you worthless faggot.
>game forces you to make a moral choice
>the "bad end" is actually the best one
Really, Atlus?
>>335972145
>no matter what the brain does the orphans will be saved
>>335969759
>expected deaths on top: 1*(1-.15) = .85
>expected deaths on bottom: 5*(1-.75) = 1.25
Pull the lever.
>>335971916
>>335973149
>>335973771
>>335970868
these are hilarious, post more
>>335970709
what's the message? i don't go to /lit/ after i found it to be a contest to find the most meaningless shit to read
>>335976709
>5*(1-.75)
>>335970479
But getting the desired result with with a 75% chance each time will result in a 23% rate of success, which is still more than 15%.
>>335971916
What topic is the fat man panel referring to?
I got the rest.
>>335977067
Expected value for a binomial distribution is equal to np. n here is the number of trials, p is the probability of success. If you flip a coin 10 times, you expect 5 heads.
If we define a "success" as "the person dies", then that chance is equal to one minus the chance that the person lives.
So p = 1 - .75 = .25, because they live with 75% probability. n = 5, the number of people. So the expected value is 5 * (1 - .75) = 5 * .25 = 1.25, or on average we will see 1.25 deaths.
You HAVE taken basic statistics, right?
>>335971916
>EthicsClass.jpg
>>335972145
So right is five guys killed and orphans saved
Left is five guys killed, orphans saved and ten transplant hearts run over. Kidneys are not to be taken into the equation because the brain doesn't know enough.
Right track then?
The chance that no one is injured in the bottom rail is:
(1 - 25/100)^4 * (25/100)
or about 8%
Sending the train to the top row is the correct choice.
>>335971306
IT'S THE BEAT OF MY HEART
>>335977587
That's the chance that one person is injured. The chance that nobody is injured is .75^5*100% ~= 24%.
>>335973771
i'll take my chances
i really want a goat
>>335971346
>>335971854
>let 1 guy from the 5 guys die
>not letting the alone guy die
I don't understand
>>335977587
Actually, it's 0.75^5 = 0.2373. Each person has a 0.75 chance to survive, so that event must occur 5 times if everyone must survive.
I still agree that top > bottom, though, based on >>335977531
>>335977772
Technically, it's actually the chance that everyone survives but the last person. The chance that one person dies is about 40%.
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=chance+of+1+success+in+5+tries+with+p%3D.25
>>335971034
Mass Effect's morality system though is tied into the dialogue system for the first two games, and I didn't like that because you couldn't play the game right and roleplay at the same time. You had to be all Paragon or all Renegade
>>335977126
The fat man is the one where you push a fat man off a bridge to save others. Same situation as the trolley but instead of flipping a switch you push a fat guy off a bridge.
Who heir /lit/?
>>335978448
How can you have something as good as the Bible anywhere near anything about New Zealand?
>>335970096
>All 30 people on the train are dead
GOOD JOB ASSHOLE.
>>335970578
Pull the lever, then walk away. Never observe it.
>>335978701
So you kill everybody on the C line AND the guy on the B line.
Nice job, asshole.
>>335978448
>having a bible
>>335978448
reading's for fags
>>335978829
No I don't. They're all dead and alive at the same time. As long as I don't observe the train, they're going to stay in a state of un-death forever. And since I pulled the lever, C line is fine.
>>335978847
>not having a bible
Give it a read sometime, that shit's hardcore.
>>335979163
Great to get your torture fetish porn
>>335969759
>game forces you to make a moral choice
>game register the choice you take
>you as a kind person do the right thing.
>game shows you what other players choose.
>over 85% picked the morally wrong one.
and this is why i fucking hate people.
this is the only morally ambiguous choice
>>335970898
babies taste delicious if cooked properly.
>>335973793
unfortunately it IS multi-track drifting and keeps going
DON'T YOU SEE MY
CONDITION
>>335975505
here did they say that that as the bad ending?
This is literally just Loss.jpeg
>>335981379
>>335980775
I guess not specifically but it ends quite early and you miss out on a lot of content by doing it. I don't consider it a bad ending exactly, but it seems framed that way to me.
>>335969759
Just like any other videogame when you have 95% hit chance and the enemy is stunned, disabled, sick, blind and mutilated. You attack 5 times and you miss. You have sword of evasion and the medallion of supreme invulnerability. Still, the enemy, without weapons or even arms, attacks you... and hit a critical strike with the death blow ability. You are death.
>>335969759
What is the race of each person? That's pretty important.
>>335979263
And them crazy-ass angels
Jews must have some ghetto psychodelics
>>335969759
In Deus Ex HR you can save both people and that scientist chick.
>Game give you moral choice
>Options aren't telegraphed
>the decision is integrated into the The game is tone and setting while subtlety teaching teachers the player the game mechanics
>the stakes and consequences are low but still has you make a personal decision between rebellion or submission
>>335982717
Other than SMT 4 and Bayonetta, which games have cool angel designs that aren't just humans with wings?
>>335982769
>That one achievement for not using augs or items
>forgot the latter and wasted a whole weekend savescumming through with only meal bars and a stun gun
I haven't touched it since.
>>335978448
>That awful brick structure
>>335973796
> $20
Ha, maybe if you get it in sale. God damn jews
>>335978448
POO PEELAND
>>335983759
>go for non-lethal achievement
>don't kill shit
>no achievement for some reason
Tell me about not touching it since.
>>335985425
you killed the guys in the intro level probably
>>335969759
>game forces you to do something at a point where having a choice would have actually helped
Fuck you Skyrim Blade bitch, I hope that sword dildo gets stuck up in your ass with that old fart
>>335977089
No, it wouldn't. 75% ^ 15 = 13 and change.
15% vs.
75% for first guy
56% for first and second guy
42% for the first three
31.6% for the first four
23.7% for the all five
It's better to run over all 5 of them.
Hard mode incoming
>>335986184
>physical waifu
>physical
The best
>>335986293
>>335986286
>>335973149
>>335971916
>>335971550
>>335971140
post more edits, im laffin
>>335977549
thats literally the joke you fucking moron
>>335977126
veil of ignorance
>>335970709
Didn't know these dank meme belongs to /lit/
How do they even have fun over there
>>335986830
and also the version of trolley problem where you push him off the bridge to stop the train. So you are implicitly killing someone to save the 5 instead of saying the train kills the 1.
some versions have the fatguy be the one to tie the victims up to get a sense of revenge justice too.
>>335977126
It's a variant of the trolley problem. In this one, there is no switch and no second track, but there just happens to be an extraordinarily fat man hanging around near the tracks. If you push him over onto the tracks, you can save the five people at the expense of the fat man's life.
Ignoring such questions as "how goddamn fat do you have to be to derail an out-of-control train" or "how am I able to push someone this heavy anyway", this experiment is interesting because people who would otherwise pull the lever tend to be much more reticent to murder the fat man, even though they're objectively the same thing.
I really hated the ending choice of inFamous 2.
Actively killing tens of thousands was the "good" choice.
Doing nothing and letting nature and evolution take its course killing millions was "evil" (as opposed to say neutral)
>>335987204
doing nothing isnt always neutral.
>>335969759
>morals force you to make a game choice
I'd probably set it to the lower path. More people killed, the better.
>>335970709
>The one lone train in a circle
This got me good.
>>335986184
>3DPD
We all know the correct choice here.
>>335971030
Nice may may
>>335987313
>/v/ hates you for it
>>335969759
>game forces you to make a moral choice
>it's wrong regardless
example
>you can only save your girlfriend or some doctors
>decide to save your girlfriend
>it was actually a random woman and your girlfriend was with the doctors, because she's a doctor
>reload and save the doctors since I'm not falling for that trick
>your girlfriend isn't with the doctors and is by herself this time
>she dies regardless
>>335972540
That's actually a pretty fun and unique thing. Neat.
>>335973771
always YES
>>335969759
>5 die or just one
>saving the one turns out to be a powerful npc ally that gives you items and his aid if you kill the remaining pissed off survivors
You know this to be true in vidya.
>>335971306
DEJA VU
I HAVE BEEN IN THIS PLACE BEFORE
>>335987204
in the first one climb tower 1 and save 12 innocent people, or climb tower 2 and save your gf
be good guy, decide to climb 1.
get turned around, accidentally climb wrong tower, everyone thinks I did it on purpose
>>335988264
IT'S TRUE THAT I KILLED MY MENTOR, BUT I WAS NOT HIS MURDERER
>>335988069
>pick between your girlfriend and some plebeians
>even if you pick her, she leaves you
>you can hook back up with her further in the game
>if you do, you catch her STD
In retrospect, it's hilarious.
>>335979118
See the problem I have with this is that each of the tied victims would be an observer so they would know which track was fucked. Also you have a sense of touch(vibrations of the crash) and hearing (allowing you to hear who got hit). It's like saying that the if a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it that it doesn't make a sound and the tree is in superposition until someone observes it. I always had a hard time conceptualizing quantum mechanics on a macro scale.
>game gives you a choice between killing your brother or your friends
>choose your brother, its the bad ending
>pick your friends, youstill die anyway to save some girl who is loosely related to you
>>335988069
To be fair, while it is unfair from the players point of view, it makes sense in universe becausebig bad is you from the future so he knows exactly what you'll pick and adjusts accordingly
>>335986184
Eh, one of the millionaires will probably survive.
>>335972340
>Either choose to save (your girlfriend) or these five doctors
>Save the doctors, she dies
>Save her instead
>It was just a girl with the same name as her
>She was actually one of the five doctors
Thanks Infamous.
>>335988684
That's because Schrodinger's cat is an attempt to illustrate the problems with that model of quantum mechanics and how stupid it is.
>>335988961
good point. thanks.
>>335988971
and will send assassins to hunt you down because he knows you let them to die.
>>335970578
Easy, pull the lever, then pull the lever again.
This is the Monty Hall problem all over again.
>>335986184
>physical waifu
>>335986184
>waifu
that's where you fucked up, anon
>>335972145
>complexity is irreducible
Shut up.
We doing this shit?
>>335970709
>guy tied up on track with the lever
I fucking lost it desu
>>335969759
There's a 24% of full success on bottom.
But take the top for that sweet timesave and just kill him.
>>335991291
>assassin
Actually killed someone, directly responsible
>husband
Obviously wanted to be out of town for the killer he hired, directly responsable
>wife
Shouldna done dat, only responsible if she knew her husband would kill her
>lover
>boatman
But everyone's just a product of their environment. Blame the big bang that set the stage for this situation.
>>335991291
>Wife
>Husband
>Lover
>Boatman
>Assassin
The wife caused the predicament. The husband obviously hired the Assassin. The Lover's refusal to lend 50c caused her death. The Boatman refused without knowledge of the current predicament. The Assassin was merely doing his job.
>>335969759
I would so savescum through this without a second thought.
>>335991291
>Assassin
He killed her.
>Lover
He knew she would die and did nothing.
>Wife
She's got herself into this pickle of a situation.
Boatman and husband are innocent without any further information. It doesn't say if she told the boatman about the assassin and the husband was out of town and didn't know she would be unfaithful.
>>335971916
Duel the tortoise
>>335991792
The Assassin's job was the Wife's death, though. How is does that make him the least responsible?
>>335991880
Each attack deals 50% of his current hp. Have fun.
>>335991991
It wasn't anything personnel though.
>>335991291
assassin
lover
wife
husband
boatsman
if you disagree with any of this you're an idiot
>>335991291
the wife
the assassin
the lover
the boatman
the husband
>>335992126
The Husband obviously hired the Assassin. It states nowhere he was oblivious to the relationship and he was persistent to leave without her company.
>>335992193
Close.
Wife, Lover, Assassin, Boatman, Husband is the correct answer.
>>335992214
>The Husband obviously hired the Assassin
That's not what it says. This is basic highschool stuff, anon. You read what it says, directly, and form an answer based on nothing but what's in the text.
>>335991291
>autismtest.png
more like feminismtest.png
but i'll bite
>wife (cheating slut)
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>husband(was testing his wife see point one) and assassin(was his job)
>lover
>boatmen
>>335992214
Because it was a business trip that she would otherwise ruin. It's purely speculation that his business would be to hire an assassin and usually in the case of infidelity the one being cucked does not know. There's no reason to assume the husband knew or his wife's infidelity.
given the current information, the husband, lover, and boatman are all 100% innocent and ranking them is silly.
that being said, someone who kills for money is slightly worse than a cheater.
>>335992295
>Why should I end it?
>It's wrong.
>I guess you're right. Might as well kill myself.
This writing holy shit.
>>335992214
don't assume things
>>335970709
the fuckijg figure 8
>>335978448
if i put that train on a treadmill, would it take off?
>>335992326
It's heavily implied. Why else would he leave on the exact night the Assassin arrives, refusing to take her and the Assassin is there when she attempts to return. He knows about the Lover.
>>335987103
>even though they're objectively the same thing.
They aren't.
>>335991291
wife
husband if he hired the assassin, or anyone else if they instead hired the assassin
lover
assassin if the assassin was human and murder is illegal
lover if the assassination was from a cause not related to this story, and it really was her fault
assassin if murder is legal
husband if he didn't hire the assassin
boatman
assassin if a machine
>>335992436
A train needs tracks.
>>335992489
>It's heavily implied.
Where do you read this?
>>335992512
What does legality have to do with this?
>>335989453
lol
>>335992489
>Autism test.png
This isn't about forming assumptions. Work with the facts alone.
>>335992512
the wife is responsible for getting herself killed, is she?
>>335992513
if i put a treadmill on train tracks, would it move?
Why not just untie the one alone in the track and then pull the lever?
>>335992616
there's no time
you'd be letting the gang die
>>335977531
nigga you need to go retake econ
>>335991291
Anyone putting anyone but the assassin at the top is a retard.
>But, it's not his fault. It's the guy who hired him!
By this logic, if someone told me to shoot someone else and I'd do it, it wouldn't actually be my fault. The person performing the action is to blame and the assassin killed the wife. The dumb, whore slut should not have crossed the bridge though, so she's obviously second.
>>335992616
Then it's not a morality test.
is there a loss version of this?
>>335992595
we don't know for sure the cause of the assassin's appearance
for example, she could have had foreknowledge of the assassin and had the chance to stay home but wanted the d too badly
>>335992558
well it says "guilt" so
>>335970578
Quantum effects for a train are negligible
>>335969759
the correct answer to this morality question is to not pull the lever, because if you do so, you're responsible for killing someone
>>335992616
Because that's not part of the test.
I bet you're the kind of guy who, when presented with either A or B, say you'll pick C, put on your cool guy shades, spin 360 degrees and moonwalk away.
>>335992821
>>335992723
if JRPGs have taught me anything is that if you believe hard enough you can defy the odds and make the impossible happen so I would choose to try and save everyone
The track is currently headed to Rail A. If I allow that to occur, then the group on Rail B is guaranteed to live, while the man on A is all but certainly dead.
On the other hand, B has a good chance of leaving many survivors, and since the odds of all surviving are 1/1024 (1/4, over the course of 5 trials), making A the objectively correct choice
BUT I AM A POWERFUL ESPER, SO I SEND MY CONSCIOUSNESS BACK TO BEFORE I MADE THE DECISION SO I CAN WITNESS ALL ENDINGS AND NOT BETRAY MY ROBOTFU
>>335992805
That's legality, not morality you're talking of. The whole point is that through inaction you're either responsible for 5 deaths or 1 death through action.
>>335992987
I wonder what shithole legal system would punish someone for pulling the lever anyway
>>335992987
letting someone die is different than actively killing someone
>>335992987
My morals constitute whatever is best for me
>>335992987
>responsible
Only and only for the 5 If you pull the lever. If you do nothing you cannot be held resonsible.
>>335993068
I wonder what shithole legal system would punish someone for jacking off to pictures. Different places have different laws based on different morals.
>>335993086
what a kant
>>335991291
This is the easiest thing ever.
Only the assassin and wife are responsible. If the wife was forced to cross the bridge, then you could start holding the lover and the boatman (if he knew about the assassin) responsible. However, she had the choice of either getting caught cheating or dying, so neither the boatman nor the lover were under any obligation to help her, as she could've simply taken responsibility for her own actions by picking the former option.
>>335993159
I get it, you don't like canadians
neither do I
seriously though, what country does that
>>335993194
ayl mao
>>335993215
The question is to name them in order of responsibility, which is how it becomes interesting. Just saying the wife and assassin is guilty isn't enough.
>>335993158
It's not about others holding you responsible, it's about introspection.
>>335993086
Patently false. Just because the outcome is the same doesn't mean that the actions taken to get to the outcome are equivalent in their moral analysis, there's valid moral reasons to distinguish between both.
>>335993337
And I introspectively don't want to get in any legal trouble for shit
>>335993372
Wasn't that what he was saying?
>>335993453
I'm retarded. Thanks for helping me figure that out
>>335993283
He did that though. He held the wife and assassin in equal first place of responsibility because she willingly went to her death and absolved the other three.
1. Wife, Assassin
3. Husband, Lover, Boatman
>>335985871
No it's not.
The chance of all of them surviving is 0.75^5, which is about 24%
>>335992821
Nothing wrong with that.
