Just for fun: a philosophy/ethics question

by 50 replies
68
The following is a hypothetical situation. If you want to participate, please explain what you would do and why.

- - - -

You are in a tower at a rail yard where you can control one switch. A train is approaching the fork in the tracks with that switch. (You cannot leave the tower or call anyone until the train passes.)

On one track, a person is tied to the rails. 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. If you switch the train onto the other track, it will pass safely onto its destination, but it will kill the person tied to the tracks.

It's your decision . . .
#off topic forum
  • 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..
    • [1] reply
    • 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
  • Banned
    One person dies and the the tower controller is brought up on charges for dereliction of duty and negligence!
    • [1] reply
    • 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.)
      • [1] reply
  • 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
    • 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
  • Hold on...I need to consult my octopus...
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • 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
    • Well, exactly where were you at the time of the events, hmmm?
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • 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.
      • [3] replies
  • 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
  • Can you describe what this person tied to the tracks looks like?

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


    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [2] replies
    • 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
    • In that case... Let's sacrifice the train.
      • [ 2 ] Thanks
  • 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 "THE MORAL SIDE OF MURDER" - YouTube
  • 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
  • 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!
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed