Posts: 1227
Threads: 6
Joined: September 17, 2017
Reputation:
23
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 7:36 pm
(This post was last modified: January 24, 2018 at 7:42 pm by SaStrike.)
(January 24, 2018 at 7:24 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (January 24, 2018 at 7:03 pm)SaStrike Wrote: I guess neither matters more, we all die anyway. I was just trying to show it could be consistent. But if some people can convince themselves that sometimes it's ok to kill one innocent person for the greater of mankind as a whole then that's fine too. If they genuinely thought they are doing the right thing then can't blame them. It is a dilemma after all.
You're not killing an innocent person in the trolley scenario. You're changing the tracks so that the least amount of people are killed.
Sorry, innocent has no place in the dilemma, no idea why i included that, my bad.
If you were standing on a set of tracks that was safe and someone pulls a lever causing a train to hit you, pretty sure it's murder.
(January 24, 2018 at 7:33 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Allowing vs doing. It may be that we're inventing the dilemma entirely. Since we're not actually asking about the morality of any of these given acts, but how they modify desert for the actor in question.
Allowing vs doing? What does that mean? Which scenario? At first it may seem that allowing is the trolley scenario and doing is the surgery scenario.
But i want to bring up this point again: you're also doing an act of pulling a lever in the trolley scenario. You're also allowing 5 people to die in the surgery scenario.
Is it because pulling a lever is easier than pulling organs? For a world class surgeon the two might be equally as easy.
Posts: 69267
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
161
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 8:25 pm
(This post was last modified: January 24, 2018 at 8:32 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(January 24, 2018 at 7:36 pm)SaStrike Wrote: Allowing vs doing? What does that mean? Which scenario? At first it may seem that allowing is the trolley scenario and doing is the surgery scenario.
But i want to bring up this point again: you're also doing an act of pulling a lever in the trolley scenario. You're also allowing 5 people to die in the surgery scenario.
Is it because pulling a lever is easier than pulling organs? For a world class surgeon the two might be equally as easy.
Those are just the terms we use to describe what we find to be a relevant difference. You could reverse them any way you like, though. You could say that the doctor is allowing a death and that the switch puller is doing murder. The salient point is that no transposition of either the terms or which actor we ascribe them to can present a necessary conflict or inconsistency.
In any and all cases, killing is killing is killing. Killing one, or killing one person five separate times. We could even say that killing is always wrong, but we would still use the allowing or doing distinction not to modify the act of killing, but the moral desert of the person who'd done it. It doesn't change the fact that a person is dead, it doesn;t change the fact of how many people are dead. It deosn;t matter how easy or difficult it was. We will see two killers differently depending on the specific of the situation in which they kill. Why they do the bad thing, in essence, or in what circumstance...even if all other things are (or at least are considered to be) equal.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 879
Threads: 57
Joined: November 8, 2017
Reputation:
6
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 9:17 pm
(This post was last modified: January 24, 2018 at 9:55 pm by Haipule.)
There isn't enough information. If the five are hot females whom want my body: I will save them and let the Pope , or Donald Trump die--see ya Donny! If the five are innocent children and the one is a hot female then, see ya kids!
You see, that's just how deep I am!
Get real:
If you had to choose between: The Valkyrie, Astreja, LadyForCamus, Catholic_Lady, J a c k vs. Jesus: would you choose them or Jesus?
I know WHOM I would choose as my bud Jesus will just raise the third day anyway!
My girlfriend thinks I'm a stalker. Well...she's not my girlfriend "yet".
I discovered a new vitamin that fights cancer. I call it ...B9
I also invented a diet pill. It works great but had to quit taking it because of the side effects. Turns out my penis is larger and my hair grew back. And whoa! If you think my hair is nice!
When does size truly matter? When it's TOO big!
I'm currently working on a new pill I call "Destenze". However...now my shoes don't fit.
Posts: 69267
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
161
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 10:07 pm
(This post was last modified: January 24, 2018 at 10:10 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 7031
Threads: 250
Joined: March 4, 2011
Reputation:
78
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 10:09 pm
(January 24, 2018 at 9:17 pm)Haipule Wrote: There isn't enough information. If the five are hot females whom want my body: I will save them and let the Pope , or Donald Trump die--see ya Donny! If the five are innocent children and the one is a hot female then, see ya kids!
You see, that's just how deep I am!
Get real:
If you had to choose between: The Valkyrie, Astreja, LadyForCamus, Catholic_Lady, J a c k vs. Jesus: would you choose them or Jesus?
I know WHOM I would choose as my bud Jesus will just raise the third day anyway!
If he can turn water into booze, he gets my vote too.
Posts: 879
Threads: 57
Joined: November 8, 2017
Reputation:
6
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 10:24 pm
(January 24, 2018 at 10:09 pm)Cinjin Wrote: (January 24, 2018 at 9:17 pm)Haipule Wrote: There isn't enough information. If the five are hot females whom want my body: I will save them and let the Pope , or Donald Trump die--see ya Donny! If the five are innocent children and the one is a hot female then, see ya kids!
You see, that's just how deep I am!
Get real:
If you had to choose between: The Valkyrie, Astreja, LadyForCamus, Catholic_Lady, J a c k vs. Jesus: would you choose them or Jesus?
I know WHOM I would choose as my bud Jesus will just raise the third day anyway!
If he can turn water into booze, he gets my vote too. Oh yeah Dude! I'll follow you anywhere and I'm bringin' my water bottle!
My girlfriend thinks I'm a stalker. Well...she's not my girlfriend "yet".
I discovered a new vitamin that fights cancer. I call it ...B9
I also invented a diet pill. It works great but had to quit taking it because of the side effects. Turns out my penis is larger and my hair grew back. And whoa! If you think my hair is nice!
When does size truly matter? When it's TOO big!
I'm currently working on a new pill I call "Destenze". However...now my shoes don't fit.
Posts: 5599
Threads: 37
Joined: July 13, 2015
Reputation:
61
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 10:34 pm
(This post was last modified: January 24, 2018 at 10:36 pm by Athene.)
(January 24, 2018 at 7:24 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (January 24, 2018 at 7:03 pm)SaStrike Wrote: I guess neither matters more, we all die anyway. I was just trying to show it could be consistent. But if some people can convince themselves that sometimes it's ok to kill one innocent person for the greater of mankind as a whole then that's fine too. If they genuinely thought they are doing the right thing then can't blame them. It is a dilemma after all.
You're not killing an innocent person in the trolley scenario. You're changing the tracks so that the least amount of people are killed.
Would you find a shoving a large man off a cliff and onto the tracks in order to prevent the trolley from colliding with the five strangers to be a morally correct choice?
Because there's no difference between the two other than one variation giving the false impression that the subject hasn't killed someone, but simply having made a "choice" because he/she didn't have to actually get his/her hands dirty, so to speak. And of course, in the surgeon scenario, the blood on the hands in quite literal, thus making it even easier for subjects to deem as immoral.
I perceive my decisions in both trolley variations as choosing NOT to murder one innocent person in order to save five innocent people from a tragedy that was not of my creation and beyond my control. Precisely the same dilemma that's presented in the surgeon scenario, in my view, which is why my answers are consistent. The only notable difference is the level of detachment involved in the required killings.
If taking an innocent person's life in an act of murder and human sacrifice is that ONLY solution to a given problem, then I would easily consider that a "There was nothing I could do" moment, because the solution is unreasonable and unacceptable to me, on a personal level.
I recognize that others' perceptions of the moral obligations presented in these hypothetical dilemmas differ, and that's fine. I don't deem them or their answers as immoral because there are no "right" answers, as far as I'm concerned.
Posts: 28870
Threads: 528
Joined: June 16, 2015
Reputation:
89
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 10:39 pm
With the trolley, do I get to interview the people on the tracks? Some of them may need killin. (this assumes the tracks are in Texas)
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental.
Posts: 5599
Threads: 37
Joined: July 13, 2015
Reputation:
61
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 10:45 pm
What if the tracks are in Jersey?
You finish your Big Gulp, and keep walking. 
Posts: 5664
Threads: 219
Joined: June 20, 2016
Reputation:
61
RE: Trolley Problem/Consistency in Ethics
January 24, 2018 at 10:45 pm
God thinks it's fun to confuse primates. Larsen's God!
|
