Just for fun: a philosophy/ethics question

10 years ago

Imagine being in that situation!

Erm, if you couldn't stop the train, then you would have to direct it to the one person on track. One life lost would'nt be as bad as hundreds..

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free cheat sheet for getting your first paying writing client on Upwork within 7 days - Learn More [/B]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190332].message }}

Claude Whitacre 10 years ago

It's a no-brainer for me. One life would have to be lost. But if it were my wife or son on the tracks? Sorry, some of those people are going to die.
- [ 3 ] Thanks
- 2 replies
Signature
One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190382].message }}
- Frank Donovan 10 years ago
  
  So, you're in the tower with, presumably, a great all-round view, and you didn't notice someone being tied to the tracks? What were you doing?
  
  .
  
  [ 6 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190471].message }}
- lanfear63 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre
  
  It's a no-brainer for me. One life would have to be lost. But if it were my wife or son on the tracks? Sorry, some of those people are going to die.
  
  Wife and son, certainly! Mother in law, flick the switch and go for a pint. Spock told me that!
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Feel The Power Of The Mark Side
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193624].message }}

ForumGuru

Banned 10 years ago

One person dies and the the tower controller is brought up on charges for dereliction of duty and negligence!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190515].message }}

Hopeless Bromantic

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ForumGuru

One person dies and the the tower controller is brought up on charges for dereliction of duty and negligence!

Okay, let's suppose - just to clarify - that switching the tracks isn't actually your job; you just happen to be in the tower because of a set of random circumstances. (And the person on the tracks was already tied to them when you got there.)

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Bros find strictly platonic dudes on seekBromance.com
_______________________________________________
"It's pretty simple. You work hard, you believe anything is possible, and you try to make the world better."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190577].message }}

Claude Whitacre

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

Okay, let's suppose - just to clarify - that switching the tracks isn't actually your job; you just happen to be in the tower because of a set of random circumstances. (And the person on the tracks was already tied to them when you got there.)

Welcome to my world.

I did a question about cutting off your finger to save the lives of 10,000 strangers...and I got jerked around by "What if" questions for maybe 20 posts. I almost took that long to see that I was being teased.

"But what if you were blindfolded?"

"What if today was your last day?"

"What if you knew that nobody would ever find out that you made that decision?"

"What if the person on the tracks was a beautiful woman...who would be very grateful if you saved her life?"

Originally Posted by Dan Riffle

Let's assume the person tied to the tracks is Claude.

Can the switch be manipulated in a fashion to have the train back over him after it passes? You know, just in case?

I thought we liked each other...why are you being so mean to me?

Is it because I'm fat?

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190601].message }}

Hopeless Bromantic

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre

Welcome to my world.

I did a question about cutting off your finger to save the lives of 10,000 strangers...and I got jerked around by "What if" questions for maybe 20 posts. I almost took that long to see that I was being teased.

"But what if you were blindfolded?"

"What if today was your last day?"

"What if you knew that nobody would ever find out that you made that decision?"

"What if the person on the tracks was a beautiful woman...who would be very grateful if you saved her life?"

"What if the person on the tracks was Riffle?"

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Bros find strictly platonic dudes on seekBromance.com
_______________________________________________
"It's pretty simple. You work hard, you believe anything is possible, and you try to make the world better."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190638].message }}

lanfear63 10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

"What if the person on the tracks was Riffle?"

Riffle would be killed of course cos he only does one liners
- Thanks
Signature

Feel The Power Of The Mark Side
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190832].message }}

Dan Riffle

10 years ago

Let's assume the person tied to the tracks is Claude.

Can the switch be manipulated in a fashion to have the train back over him after it passes? You know, just in case?

[ 14 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190541].message }}

lanfear63

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Dan Riffle

Let's assume the person tied to the tracks is Claude.

Can the switch be manipulated in a fashion to have the train back over him after it passes? You know, just in case?

Masterpiece of evil satire!

Spock would say, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" flick the switch to the single person and go down the pub for a pint.

Captain Kirk would re-program the scenario so no-one gets killed.

But, I'm afraid you did not allow for the fact that I'm Superman, a superhero and I would just fly down and lift up the train and deposit it further down the track safely.

Easiest for Spock, minimum work and because it's logical did not have a problem with it.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190649].message }}

lanfear63 10 years ago

Actually, who am I to interfere with the lives of "Railway Track Bondage Suicide Fetishists" anyway. Live and let die I say!
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Feel The Power Of The Mark Side
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190702].message }}

Kurt

10 years ago

Hold on...I need to consult my octopus...

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190727].message }}

HeySal

10 years ago

So you're in a tower with the main view and control -- with no means of calling anyone to get that person off the track in time if possible?

Of course people will sacrifice one for the many. That's not that much of a test.

Uh so how do ya suppose Claude got tied to the tracks? Hey, Dan - any ideas on that one?

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190767].message }}

Dan Riffle 10 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Uh so how do ya suppose Claude got tied to the tracks? Hey, Dan - any ideas on that one?

Well, exactly where were you at the time of the events, hmmm?
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190789].message }}

Hopeless Bromantic

10 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

So you're in a tower with the main view and control -- with no means of calling anyone to get that person off the track in time if possible?

Of course people will sacrifice one for the many. That's not that much of a test.

That option has a couple of problems, though.

The first issue is legal: as soon as you move the switch, it's murder no matter how you look at it - whereas if you do nothing, it's just manslaughter (at least in the US, where there's no 'good samaritan' law). Besides, if the train derails, any legal charges are almost certainly getting made against whoever was in charge of railroad safety, not you.

The other problem lies in whether life can or should be quantified. What if the person on the tracks is a brilliant heart surgeon who will likely continue to save many more lives? What if the train is carrying only a group of convicted serial child molesters to prison? You get the idea.

The Spock approach may seem elegant, but it's definitely not perfect.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Bros find strictly platonic dudes on seekBromance.com
_______________________________________________
"It's pretty simple. You work hard, you believe anything is possible, and you try to make the world better."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190844].message }}

Dennis Gaskill

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

The first issue is legal: as soon as you move the switch, it's murder no matter how you look at it - whereas if you do nothing, it's just manslaughter (at least in the US, where there's no 'good samaritan' law).

All states have Good Samaritan laws. What, and who, those laws cover varies a great deal. Some states even compel citizens to render help. For example, in Vermont an individual can be fined up to $100 for not offering emergency assistance.

What is lacking in the United States is a unified federal statute to minimize variations from state to state.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190940].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill

All states have Good Samaritan laws. What, and who, those laws cover varies a great deal. Some states even compel citizens to render help. For example, in Vermont an individual can be fined up to $100 for not offering emergency assistance.

What is lacking in the United States is a unified federal statute to minimize variations from state to state.

Last I heard, the good samaritan law didn't exist everywhere in the US. ALSO, the law DOES fly against the good samaritan law. If you save a persons life, they can actually sue for wrongful life! Wrongful life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Contrary to wikipedia, there HAVE been adults that have sued people for providing lifesaving measures, and succeeding. They will actually do the same to DOCTORS in hospitals, though THERE, they are expected to file a DNR NLM(?) "Do Not Resuscitate" "No life saving measures". SO, if a person is dying, and a drug, oxygen, or CPR could save them, it is not to be done.

Back to THIS though, this really assumes a lot. Could a train REALLY go over a person without running a high risk of being derailed? The track damage COULD be relatively minor by comparison.

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193233].message }}

Frank Donovan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Back to THIS though, this really assumes a lot. Could a train REALLY go over a person without running a high risk of being derailed? The track damage COULD be relatively minor by comparison.

Steve, are you trying to say something about Claude's size?

.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193262].message }}

Dennis Gaskill

10 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Last I heard, the good samaritan law didn't exist everywhere in the US.

According to ASTHO all states have a Good Samaritan law. Like I said, who those laws protect and what kind of protection is afforded varies greatly.

Volunteer Protection Acts and Good Samaritan Laws Fact Sheet | State Public Health | ASTHO

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193272].message }}

Hopeless Bromantic

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill

According to ASTHO all states have a Good Samaritan law. Like I said, who those laws protect and what kind of protection is afforded varies greatly.

Volunteer Protection Acts and Good Samaritan Laws Fact Sheet | State Public Health | ASTHO

Be that as it may, would any such law apply in this kind of scenario? My guess would be no.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Bros find strictly platonic dudes on seekBromance.com
_______________________________________________
"It's pretty simple. You work hard, you believe anything is possible, and you try to make the world better."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193298].message }}

Dennis Gaskill

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

Be that as it may, would any such law apply in this kind of scenario? My guess would be no.

I don't really see any point in guessing. Neither of us know, and the law may be intentionally vague in order to leave room for the discretionary judgment of a court to decide specific cases.

You had stated there were no Good Samaritan laws in the US. I thought it best not to leave that statement out there for others to believe since it's not true, but I wasn't trying to relate it to your invented scenario.

If you really want me to guess though, I'd say it would apply in some places and not in others. I don't think it would be a black and white decision in most states. For example, in Wisconsin:

"Any person who renders emergency care at the scene of any emergency or accident in good faith shall be immune from civil liability for his or her acts or omissions in rendering such emergency care."

About that, Lawyers on Lawyers state:

The bad news is that not everyone knows what emergency care is and which acts are covered?

It could be argued that throwing the switch was an act of emergency care.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193360].message }}

MissTerraK 10 years ago

Okay, it's just too doggone bad that you all don't believe in psychics, for if you did, then you would believe me when I say that I foresaw the whole thing and therefore, I...

No, I did not call out security guards to make sure no one was tied to the tracks...

And no, I did not go ahead and have the tracks replaced before they could become damaged...

I saw this scenario beforehand so I ...

called in sick that day! :p

Terra
- [ 4 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193598].message }}

Claude Whitacre

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

That option has a couple of problems, though.

The first issue is legal: as soon as you move the switch, it's murder no matter how you look at it - whereas if you do nothing, it's just manslaughter (at least in the US, where there's no 'good samaritan' law). Besides, if the train derails, any legal charges are almost certainly getting made against whoever was in charge of railroad safety, not you.

The other problem lies in whether life can or should be quantified. What if the person on the tracks is a brilliant heart surgeon who will likely continue to save many more lives? What if the train is carrying only a group of convicted serial child molesters to prison? You get the idea.

The Spock approach may seem elegant, but it's definitely not perfect.

I was assuming the person making this decision had none of those facts.

I hope this doesn't sound odd, but what has legality have to do with it?
Would anyone be thinking about that? I sure wouldn't.

Thanks

Signature

One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9192486].message }}

Frank Donovan

10 years ago

Okay, Hopeless Bro, let's take this seriously for a minute.

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

The other track is damaged. If you do nothing, the train will continue onto the damaged track and derail. Many of the passengers and crew will be killed as a result.

Assuming the above is true, then the operator really doesn't have an option. If the only other track is damaged in a way that would result in the train derailing, the option to switch tracks simply isn't there.

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

The other problem lies in whether life can or should be quantified. What if the person on the tracks is a brilliant heart surgeon who will likely continue to save many more lives? What if the train is carrying only a group of convicted serial child molesters to prison? You get the idea.

That's a non argument. The future is an abstract concept - it doesn't exist until it happens (at which time, of course, it's no longer the future). Every human life has exactly the same value. Therefore, once you begin to quantify a life, you diminish them all.

Meh. Flippant was more fun.

Frank

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9192546].message }}

Hopeless Bromantic

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Frank Donovan

Okay, Hopeless Bro, let's take this seriously for a minute.

Assuming the above is true, then the operator really doesn't have an option. If the only other track is damaged in a way that would result in the train derailing, the option to switch tracks simply isn't there.

I must have missed a step in following how you reached that conclusion. What is it that makes failing to switch tracks "not an option?" Granted, it's not a pleasant option but it's still physically possible, right? :confused:

That's a non argument. The future is an abstract concept - it doesn't exist until it happens (at which time, of course, it's no longer the future). Every human life has exactly the same value. Therefore, once you begin to quantify a life, you diminish them all.

That's a very legitimate view, which many of the great philosophers share (and which I personally am inclined to agree with). But, because this is a 'fun' thread, I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment and ask a few other questions?

1. Would you be willing to let someone else kill you to save the passengers on the train?
2. In a situation like this, does the end justify the means?
3. Claude said he'd let the train derail to save his wife or son. Does that make him evil?

By the way, anyone's welcome to answer these (except Riffle!

). They're just food for thought.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Bros find strictly platonic dudes on seekBromance.com
_______________________________________________
"It's pretty simple. You work hard, you believe anything is possible, and you try to make the world better."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9192771].message }}

Dan Riffle

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

1. Would you be willing to let someone else kill you to save the passengers on the train?

No. While speaking theoretically, every life has equal value, my life is considerably more valuable to me than a group of strangers. Replace the passengers variable with friends and/or family and my answer might change.

2. In a situation like this, does the end justify the means?

Irrelevant. Based on the parameters, only one of two outcomes are possible. We've just chosen which outcome. Although, this question is vaguely worded, so I might be missing your point.

3. Claude said he'd let the train derail to save his wife or son. Does that make him evil?

No, it makes him human. (And that's the first time anyone's said that about him.)

Answered above.

Thanks

Signature

Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9192817].message }}

Frank Donovan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

I must have missed a step in following how you reached that conclusion. What is it that makes failing to switch tracks "not an option?" Granted, it's not a pleasant option but it's still physically possible, right? :confused:

The switch might be in operation, but the track is damaged - it doesn't work. That means it's not fit for purpose. If it's not viable, it's not an option.

1. Would you be willing to let someone else kill you to save the passengers on the train?
If I'm tied to the track, I don't have a choice. Would I volunteer my life to save the passengers? Not unless I knew there were loved ones on board. Otherwise, self-preservation takes precedence.

2. In a situation like this, does the end justify the means?
Depends on the end. And the means. It would also depend on whose perspective you're talking about. Each of the protagonists would likely have a different view.

3. Claude said he'd let the train derail to save his wife or son. Does that make him evil?
No, that makes him a husband and father. It's the body he hides in the freezer that makes him evil.

Frank

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9192850].message }}

Frank Donovan 10 years ago

Hey Dan - stop posting before me and stealing my answers!

.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9192911].message }}
- Dan Riffle 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Frank Donovan
  
  Hey Dan - stop posting before me and stealing my answers!
  
  .
  
  I consider it an honor to share answers with you.
  
  [ 2 ] Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9192957].message }}
  
  Claude Whitacre 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Dan Riffle
  
  I consider it an honor to share answers with you.
  
  Hey! It sickens me that you would show respect to another person.
  
  Who are you, and what have you done with Riffle?
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr
  
  What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193035].message }}
  
  Dan Riffle 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre
  
  Hey! It sickens me that you would show respect to another person.
  
  Who are you, and what have you done with Riffle?
  
  Trust me, if it were you I was agreeing with, I'd question my humanity.
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193085].message }}

Hopeless Bromantic

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Frank Donovan

1. Would you be willing to let someone else kill you to save the passengers on the train?

If I'm tied to the track, I don't have a choice. Would I volunteer my life to save the passengers? Not unless I knew there were loved ones on board. Otherwise, self-preservation takes precedence.

That being the case, how can you claim that every individual human life has the same value as every other, when you know that you can't behave in a way that's consistent with this principle?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Bros find strictly platonic dudes on seekBromance.com
_______________________________________________
"It's pretty simple. You work hard, you believe anything is possible, and you try to make the world better."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193156].message }}

Dan Riffle

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

That being the case, how can you claim that every individual human life has the same value as every other, when you know that you can't behave in a way that's consistent with this principle?

Because we're genetically wired for self-preservation. Theoretically we're all equal. However, I'll be damned if I'm going to let a theory keep me from seeing the next sunrise.

Thanks

Signature

Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193181].message }}

Frank Donovan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

That being the case, how can you claim that every individual human life has the same value as every other, when you know that you can't behave in a way that's consistent with this principle?

There's no conflict. Our genes are programmed to survive, to reproduce and continue the species. That's why we have an instinct for self-preservation and an inbuilt urge to protect those whose genes are close to ours. Without that, our species would never have reached this point. On a wider level, the value we attach to all human life also serves to protect the species. It's not simply altruism - genes really are quite selfish, to quote a phrase.

We use props like philosophy and ethics to dress up these instincts and lend a veneer of rationality to our behaviour.

Frank

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193287].message }}

Claude Whitacre

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Frank Donovan

There's no conflict. Our genes are programmed to survive, to reproduce and continue the species. That's why we have an instinct for self-preservation and an inbuilt urge to protect those whose genes are close to ours. Without that, our species would never have reached this point. On a wider level, the value we attach to all human life also serves to protect the species. It's not simply altruism - genes really are quite selfish, to quote a phrase.

We use props like philosophy and ethics to dress up these instincts and lend a veneer of rationality to our behaviour.

Frank

Smart. It's also why we defend our tribe, and then our species. It's why we don't have sex with direct relatives. Our intelligence serves our basic drives. Morality and Laws are created after the fact.

Insightful. Now I see why Riffle was seduced by you.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193322].message }}

Frank Donovan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre

Now I know why Riffle left me for you.

Nah. Sharing answers is the oldest trick in the book - it's so transparent. He's just trying to make you jealous.

.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193356].message }}

Claude Whitacre

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Frank Donovan

Nah. Sharing answers is the oldest trick in the book - it's so transparent. He's just trying to make you jealous.

.

Well, I'll have you know...that it didn't work. I'm not jealous at all! Because I know...in my heart of hearts..

If I let him go...if he's mine...he'll fly back....if he doesn't fly back to me...he was never mine. Fly away, little Riffle.

(I threw up in my mouth a little, typing that. But it was worth it)

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193957].message }}

Dan Riffle

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre

(I threw up in my mouth a little, typing that. But it was worth it)

No. No, it wasn't.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193965].message }}

Kay King

10 years ago

In that case, why not be completely aboveboard and state that all human life has equal value except for your own, which has more value than anyone else's as a consequence of your survival instinct?

Because we aren't that honest - and we don't believe that of ourselves. We'd like to believe we are altruistic but our genetic makeup will put our "self" at the top of the heap in importance without conscious thought.

Heroes are those who override their survival instincts and put others first. Most of us aren't heroes.

Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

Dear April: I don't want any trouble from you.

January was long, February was iffy, March was a freaking dumpster fire.

So sit down, be quiet, and don't touch anything.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9194837].message }}

Hopeless Bromantic

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Frank Donovan

There's no conflict. Our genes are programmed to survive, to reproduce and continue the species. That's why we have an instinct for self-preservation and an inbuilt urge to protect those whose genes are close to ours. Without that, our species would never have reached this point. On a wider level, the value we attach to all human life also serves to protect the species. It's not simply altruism - genes really are quite selfish, to quote a phrase.

We use props like philosophy and ethics to dress up these instincts and lend a veneer of rationality to our behaviour.

In that case, why not be completely aboveboard and state that all human life has equal value except for your own, which has more value than anyone else's as a consequence of your survival instinct?

Is such a statement any less rational?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Bros find strictly platonic dudes on seekBromance.com
_______________________________________________
"It's pretty simple. You work hard, you believe anything is possible, and you try to make the world better."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193627].message }}

Frank Donovan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

In that case, why not be completely aboveboard and state that all human life has equal value except for your own, which has more value than anyone else's as a consequence of your survival instinct?

To be clear, it's not my survival instinct - we're all genetically programmed that way. But you posed this as a philosophical/ethical question. That all human life has an equal value is a philosophical/ethical statement in response to that question. And we have to hold on to that tenet precisely because we're subservient to our genes.

How any one individual would react in a given situation is a different matter. You may have noticed, acting rationally isn't the human default mode.

Frank

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193671].message }}

Claude Whitacre 10 years ago

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

1. Would you be willing to let someone else kill you to save the passengers on the train?

. Strangers on a train? No. Wife or Son? Yes.

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

2. In a situation like this, does the end justify the means?

I think that question is asked after the incident. But it would never enter my mind, while making the choice. The only way I could weigh the decision, is if it were a stranger on the tracks, and strangers in the train.
Then one life equals another...because it's an abstract construct.

Originally Posted by Hopeless Bromantic

3. Claude said he'd let the train derail to save his wife or son. Does that make him evil?

It's worse than that. Any group, no matter how big....
And any future consequence just wouldn't enter into it.

Originally Posted by Dan Riffle

Trust me, if it were you I was agreeing with, I'd question my humanity.

Why are you so mean to me? First, you make sexy eyes with Frank...and then you insult me.

I was just thinking about how much you brightened my day, with your clever anecdotes. And then you dash my feelings to the rocks.

You're a big bully. Go! Frank will never love you, like I did.
- [ 2 ] Thanks
Signature
One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9193088].message }}

whateverpedia

10 years ago

This is along the lines of a real situation that happened during WWII.

The British had managed to crack the Enigma code. From that they learned that the city of Coventry was going to be bombed by the Germans. Churchill was faced with the dilemma of whether he should evacuate the city or not.

If he did that, thousands of people would be saved, however the Germans would know that Enigma had been cracked. Knowing that, they would've changed their codes and the war would've been prolonged costing many more thousands of lives.

Churchill took the decision to sacrifice Coventry for the "greater good". What a decision to have to make though.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand.

Sadly, the person tied to the track would have to be sacrificed for the "greater good".

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?

So that blind people can hate them as well.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190819].message }}

stoltingmediagroup

10 years ago

Can you describe what this person tied to the tracks looks like?

Sometimes these things matter you know. Just sayin...

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Arnold Stolting - Stolting Media Group
"I LOVE The Song! The Vibe Is Positive And Firm!" - Kymani Marley. (Son of Bob Marley).
"Very High Quality!" Jeremy Harding - Manager / Producer. Sean Paul.
"They Are FANTASTIC!" - Willie Crawford.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190854].message }}

Kay King 10 years ago

The first issue is legal: as soon as you move the switch, it's murder no matter how you look at it - whereas if you do nothing, it's just manslaughter

other problem lies in whether life can or should be quantified.

Best to have someone on this kind of job who can think fast and make snap decisions rather than thinking first of his own liability or waxing philosophical.:p
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
Dear April: I don't want any trouble from you.
January was long, February was iffy, March was a freaking dumpster fire.
So sit down, be quiet, and don't touch anything.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190861].message }}
sagittarius 10 years ago

Originally Posted by stoltingmediagroup

Can you describe what this person tied to the tracks looks like?

Sometimes these things matter you know. Just sayin...

In that case... Let's sacrifice the train.
- [ 2 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9190863].message }}

Sumit Menon

10 years ago

Similar but even more difficult follow-up questions in Michael Sandel's Lecture from the course Justice...

Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 01...

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9194885].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

The ones going to the field didn't know where the plane was going.

Pushing the fat man would be murder. But the guy working off the side track wasn't involved either, though they may have assumed they COULD be.

If you are going to push the fat man, why not risk YOURSELF!

Medical ethics says that you should give preferential treatment to the worst that could be saved. So the one that is near death would be operated on first. Once they get to a certain point or are stable, or ahead of the others, the others can be operated on.

And doesn't ANYONE here have some sort of alarm? Even an air horn?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195185].message }}

chitrarang

10 years ago

I would prefer to save the one person. First, I can't watch the person getting killed right before my eyes. If the train derails, there is a chance that some will be injured but no one killed! Wishful thinking perhaps!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195226].message }}

Just for fun: a philosophy/ethics question

Trending Topics

Best AI for spell checking & grammar (2024)?

Google Ads, landing pages, and Clickbank links

A Very Strange Internet Problem

Carry out better target audience research

Melb, Interat, Flower Show 2024