#1 Thought experiment - "The Trolley Problem"

[robvalue]

Well yes, if I actually had to push him, that would make it harder to do than throwing a lever. I think if it was just a lever, and I didn't have any connection to any of the people, I'd throw it and then cover my eyes. I feel I could possibly do that.

Whether I could actually push someone to their death... I very much doubt it. I think my muscles would refuse to cooperate.

What if the five people I'm saving are my loved ones? Could I shove his ass over then? Harder to say. I'd have every motivation to do so, but whether I could physically do it, I don't know.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Just to throw other wrinkles into the thought problem.

1) It assumes that there are no consequences for the person making the choice. Pushing the fat man onto tracks could result in the chooser being jailed or executed, his or her family left destitute, etc. Not doing so, could leave the chooser traumatised to madness for the rest of his or her life, also with associated consequences.

2) The problem with evaluating moral choices by their consequences is that there is no end point to the effects. Time keeps pushing forward. One of the spared trolley riders could be a serial killer. The family member of the serial-killer's victim, in response to his loss, could be a life of self-less civil service and reforms that save thousands. You cannot easily say action A was the wrong because it resulted in B. While B may be an obvious and immediate harm, the long term effects of B may be far-reaching and beneficial.

[robvalue]

That would be interesting actually. I have no idea how the law would view that.

If there's clear CCTV of me stumbling across this situation and shoving the guy to his death to save five people, would I be done for manslaughter? It seems rather crazy that I would be.

And I agree, trauma is going to be bad either way. Luckily this is a highly contrived situation.

[LastPoet]

If I was so strong that I could push a fat guy big enough to stop a trolley, I could stop the trolley myself.

As to the original proposition, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few... or the one. *channels spock*

[Whateverist]

I'd like to say I'd push the fatty. But i'd like to lose a little more weight first.

[Athene]

I don't "slink away in safety", bennyboy. I'm a nurse and volunteer EMT...in real life.
I've put my ass on the line more times than I can count; I'm well aware of what it takes to save a life.

So, you can get off your f*cking high horse at any moment.
Thanks.

Okay, great.  So you are a person of action.  Why, then, would you take a position of inaction causing the deaths of 5 innocent people?  I'd think that a nurse would be so horrified at killing 5 people that she'd instinctively turn away from them.  And I think that's the difference in our positions-- you are worried about who you'd turn TOWARD than who you might be able to turn AWAY FROM.

*sigh* One more time, then.

I would NOT be responsible for killing the five people. That would be due to a set of circumstances set into motion PRIOR to my arrival, that I was unable to prevent. Committing an act of cold-blooded murder towards an innocent person in order to rescue another or others does NOT constitute saving a life in my opinion; It's simply trading a life. Sure, five people could be "saved" if I murder one. So what? 

Even more people could be saved by plucking some poor schmuck off the street, murdering him, and harvesting his vital organs. Is that acceptable?  Would one be 'letting' potential recipients die or more dramatically put, be 'killing them' by simply leaving this man alone and allowing him to live out the fucking life he was given? I don't think so. 

What's the method for determining the worth of people's lives in these situations, anyway? Age? Net worth? Lifetime earning potential? Total number of dependents? 
Or is it just a matter of simple ratios?

If it should just boil down to numbers, then what is the magic number of people that warrants killing one person for the greater good? Is it five? A couple of hundred? 
Why not merely TWO, if doing the "right thing" in these scenarios simply comes down to a matter of math?

[Homeless Nutter]

Imagine that you’re at the controls of a railway switch and there’s an out-of-control trolley coming. The tracks branch into two, one track that leads to a group of five people, and the other to one person. If you do nothing, the trolley will smash into the five people. But if you flip the switch, it’ll change tracks and strike the lone person. What do you do?

Since I'm at the controls and I'm fully aware of what the results of pulling the switch will be - that must mean that I'm somehow qualified to operate it and probably have some level of responsibility, regarding safety of people on and around the tracks. If I haven't been briefed on how to deal with this sort of situation during my training - that seems like a major oversight. I'll be sure to ask about this, if I'm ever applying for a job like that.

I'd probably throw the switch, to minimize casualties - because now only the family of one victim is likely to sue me for my actions, instead of five. And then I'd sue my employer. For emotional damage. 

A second variation of the problem involves a “fat man” and no second track — a man so large that, if you were to push him onto the tracks, his body would prevent the trolley from smashing into the group of five. So what do you do? Nothing? Or push him onto the tracks?

Well, that's a completely different situation - I'm just some dude, standing around. No one ever will blame me for not having pushed a fat person onto a track. 

Also pushing heavy people is probably harder than it sounds - there's a good chance I'll only manage to enrage the fatty, or get dragged onto the track with him/her. And even if I succeed - if there are witnesses around me - they'll probably want to lynch me, before I can explain, that I just saved a bunch of people further down the tracks.

And while the Fatty family will most likely sue me - regardless of my potential criminal trial - I'll have no one to push the responsibility onto. 

Don't get me wrong - I'd still do it, but only because I hate fat people...

[Aoi Magi]

If I have the strength to push a... ummm... bass-and-not-treble person who can stop a fuckin trolley by just lying on the tracks in front of it, I might as well just go on the tracks and stop it myself with my herculean strength.

[brewer]

What push? Throw beer and brats! Fat guy saves/dies based on his own motivation.

[Athene]

So, Thena,just to be clear, you would rather not do anything and see your 5 children die due to your inaction?

Also, @Benny, would you rather kill one of your children and save 5 or "save" one and see the other 5 get killed?

 No. I'm saying that I could not justify dragging or shoving my child to his/her death, even to save the others...just because he/she happens to be available and of suitable mass.