Trolley problem: 2035 version

[JuliaL]

Thanks all for the answers.

---

For myself, I accept the, "It an unacceptable violation of personal autonomy." argument.

---

Can you also use the same sort of nanobots to cure cancer? That would be soooo much more helpful.

Cancer was cured in 2023.  Try to keep up.

This does raise a question about homosexuality though.   Sexual orientation is not a choice now, but such a bot would make it a choice.  That raises no real ethical dilemma for me, as I don't see anything immoral same gender sex.  But, there are people, mostly Christian I imagine, who excuse homosexuality only because it is not a personal choice, or who condemn it because they think it is a personal choice.  Such a bot might set gay rights back decades.

I worry more about creation of zealot soldiers for the empire.  Whether or not they choose to be gay is a secondary issue.

Yup, totally fine.  But then again - I'm evil.

Yep, evil.  But are you chaotic, neutral or lawful evil?

I'm not clear whether you are asking:
1)  Is it permissible for me to do for my own reasons?
2)  Is it permissible for me to share the technology with a person who wishes for one of these outcomes?
To 1 I would answer no.  To 2 I would want a legally binding disclaimer signed and witnessed as well as a suitable fee for the service.
(Of course, Bob and I would probably both have to sign off on it.)

The motives of the operator of the technology are not material unless, as JennyA pointed out above, they were of the subject.

But never say never.

Let's say in 2036, a Mars sized rouge planet is detected heading towards earth on a collision course.   It is vastly beyond human capacity to avert the big splat.   There is nowhere near that we can escape to.   It take essentially the wholehearted effort of the whole mankind to build a generation ship that might allow a small human seedling population to depart on a long trip to survive.   That's humanity's only chance.

"It depends" is generally a valid answer.  I'll chalk that up as the only current vote for "Other."

First of all, this is nothing like the trolley problem, or, at least, is not in any obvious way like the trolley problem.

---

Second, your problem is really more complicated than people seem to be taking it.  The serious replies so far seem to regard using the nanobots as a violation of personal autonomy.  [Edit:  I see that while I was writing this, someone else has posted something bringing up the issue in this post.]  However, there is more at play here.

You don't say how the nanobots are administered, so I will just make up something convenient for explaining why it is more complicated than just a matter of personal autonomy.

Suppose we can just disperse the nanobots into the air, and they will seek out hosts.  Now, imagine spraying a bunch of these nanobots over an area with religious strife, like Syria and Iraq.  

---

Do you think that if everyone in Syria and Iraq suddenly became atheists, that they would kill each other less?  Or suppose we got them to Saudi Arabia, do you think that they would stop religious oppression if everyone suddenly became an atheist?

My point is, this is not merely an issue of personal autonomy, but also about how these things will affect others.  

---

I am not saying (yet) that these things should be done if they were possible, but I am saying that one should consider more than just the issue of personal autonomy.  Is, for example, the personal autonomy of a religious murderer more important than the lives of his victims?

So, you really have a hypothetical issue that has a good deal of complexity to it.

---

It's just an ethical dilemma problem.  Not all trolly problems have trollies.
I expect human conflict will continue regardless of religious orientation, forced or otherwise.
Another vote for "it depends."

How come I can identify three arguments for "other," but there is only one vote for that in the poll?

[ignoramus]

Are we talking in a future where authority doesn't have control?
If so, then it's irrelevent, personal preference.
If in this same future, people are still killing over religion, then we won't have a choice as the athorities will have already banned the technology for security reasons.