Questions of Ethics

[tapu]

So... Laney, in the latter scenario, you would act immorally by your own figuring, right? Don't get me wrong--I would, too--but the introduction of one's own loved one into this makes it practically unavoidable. Like, I don't know if I'd want to be that moral.

Now I think it's despair I'm feeling over this thread!

[LaneyDoll]

Originally Posted by tapu

So... Laney, in the latter scenario, you would act immorally by your own figuring, right? Don't get me wrong--I would, too--but the introduction of one's own loved one into this makes it practically unavoidable. Like, I don't know if I'd want to be that moral.

Now I think it's despair I'm feeling over this thread!

I agree. However, I am basing my response on this comment by the OP, "it would be interesting also to hear what variables would influence you regarding whether the bystander should throw the switch."

There are few variables I can imagine that would prevent me from sacrificing 5 to save 1. At the moment, the introduction of loved ones is the main one I can think of.

Ok, let's add this to the mix---what if, you were to find out that you would suddenly be privy, for the rest of your life, to effects of the deaths (of the 5 only) on their loved ones.

Soooo, is anyone else thinking of the movie "The Box"?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0362478/

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by tapu

So... Laney, in the latter scenario, you would act immorally by your own figuring, right? Don't get me wrong--I would, too--but the introduction of one's own loved one into this makes it practically unavoidable. Like, I don't know if I'd want to be that moral.

Now I think it's despair I'm feeling over this thread!

But why should that, of all things, make us despair? We should not be at all surprised that one would prefer their own offspring over a stranger.

Cheers
Aj

[tapu]

I often waffle when push comes to shove your kid in front of the train.

[TickledPink]

Flip the switch already!

6 lives, if I read this correct, 5 saved if said switch if flipped. It's like traige, in a way, no right or wrong, just saving the most lives.

[tapu]

Close enough!

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by TickledPink

Flip the switch already!

6 lives, if I read this correct, 5 saved if said switch if flipped. It's like traige, in a way, no right or wrong, just saving the most lives.

Precisely. I hate to go all Star Trek on folks but sometimes life really does hand you a Kobyashi Maru scenario. While we might wish that the world were filled with nothing but non-zero sum games, there really are zero-sum games and there really are scenarios where there is no 'good' choice there is only the least undesirable choice.

In our Panglossian world we would like to be able to teleport/levitate/disintegrate the train. In the real world, a train on a track will continue moving along the path of track until some outside influence causes it to change course. That means that if, for instance, there are only two tracks the train could be on and there is no physical way any of the workers on the track could get out of the way *someone* is going to die. That is my understanding of the scenario and if this scenario was inspired by an identical one in Justice by Michael Sandel then that was clearly spelled out in Sandel's scenario.

As a quick aside, I think that, as humans, we do get to say that there are things people should not do. I am perfectly comfortable saying that, for instance, while people are free to hold racist views they should not be allowed to have those racist views become the problem for others. For example, if one holds a racist view that blacks are intellectually inferior one should not be allowed to make that my problem in hiring or promotions. Whether the law provides that restraint or some ethical standard that says "my racism cannot enter into a professional context" is irrelevant to me. What matters is that someone is not in a position to make their racist views my problem.

Cheers
Aj