That's a different scenario. This one says that all the people on the track are strangers to you. That means that, if your dog was run over, you have no reason to suspect that any of these people did it.
I'm still not sure my first answer isn't right. Switching the lever is an action that directly results in a person's death by my hand. Not touching the lever is not, similarly, an action resulting in death by my hand. 'Insufficient information' is a perfectly valid rationale upon which a choice can be made. (For all I know, the situation is perfectly in-hand and no one is going to die. For all I know it's a movie shoot. Imagine if I flipped the switch and that one guy died, whereas no one should have died. I'd be up on manslaughter charges!) Note that this is not the same as Michael's response 'I have insufficient information to say what I would do.' I am participating in the thought experiment, and making one of the two allowable choices, it just happens that my choice is based on knowing that I don't know the whole situation and could conceivably make it a lot worse. Humour in an otherwise sincere thread is OK as long as: - it is incidental to one's otherwise constructive contribution, and - it is short and sweet enough that it doesn't disrupt the flow, or trigger someone else to.
Humour is just fine, but I don't want this thread turning into yet another interminable debate about Michael's screwy ideas about time. That conversation can happen somewhere else, if anybody's still interested in it.
"If you do not flip the switch, the 3 workers on the main track will surely be hit by the train. If you do flip the switch, the 1 worker on the side track will surely be hit by the train." It's not a movie shoot.
The choices are to be passive and to not try cheating death as there are worse things, like torment and danger, or you can use the common sense of the numbers, it all depends on what you believe rationalism, or omniscience. I would always choose to save the three unless they are evil, I would save the one if it were God or any higher level being that would serve a purpose. I believe in God, and I would call on a angel to stop the train. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The terms of the scenario is that you don't know any of the people. They could be good or evil. You are free, however, to assume they are human beings. That is what normal people would tend to assume in such a situation.
Because I have knowledge of the full situation, I'd likely pull the lever. This situation seems impossible to ''get right,'' so should anyone be judged for pulling or not pulling the lever? If this were a real life scenario, and you were faced with such odds, taking any life at all might feel terrible, in the end. No matter how we justify it. Is it reasonable to morally judge someone in this case, when emotions and anxiety would be running so high, if one had to make such a choice? No one should be considered ''evil'' (if that's even the right word to place here) whether they choose to pull the lever or not; it becomes a matter of which act is preferable to the other.
I voted no switch as a non believer I would be paralysed too.And I would feel that no further reflection would cause me to come to a clear decision(with everyone there I suspect) . Time would be against me and I would feel the urge to resist the temptation to act before the clock ran down. It would also run through my mind ,like Orson Welles in the 3rd Man that numbers of victims may not be a reassuring measure of the true cost of actions/events. So many sides to the question but no time to decide and making a decision for decision's sake would not necessarily be beneficial. Some decisions are seemingly necessary but distasteful. Churchill had to attack the French navy in N.Africa at the beginning of WW2 .(a similar numbers game with an inbuilt bias) Perhaps it helped his equanimity that he is reputed to have once said that "wogs begin at Calais"? Edit: a quick search indicates that this was something he was once accused of believing .I don't know if he had an answer to his accuser or not.
It's reasonable to judge. It's reasonable to not judge. You are taking a life by your actions however. No getting around that. I'd personally rather live in a world where there were no levers since I don't want random, uninformed people making such judgements.
They are but a drop of water in a endless ocean. My duty is to protect nature as a whole. If they have no afterlife and one day they will just be forgotten why wish to be? The purpose of nature is life, the purpose of life is pleasure, the purpose of pleasure is belief.
It's unreasonable to judge (imo) in this scenario, because who am I to judge your choice, given the same set of circumstance and knowledge of the situation? Suppose we didn't have this information going in? Judging presumes that I'd never act the way you would, given this situation...but maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't.
Unfortunately for you, you live in a world full of such levers, in which many people make decisions that affect you personally, without being informed about your personal wishes or circumstances.
No responses to the poll from believers in gods, yet. I don't know if we'll get any. It's interesting that the non-believers are split approximately 50-50 on the question of to flip or not to flip, though.
Who are you to judge but who are you to pull a lever that kills a person?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I'm a believer and answered the question in the thread. I usually don't ''vote'' in polls, the answers are always too restricted.
Very true, yet it doesn't change my preferences. Usually, in this world, the more responsibility one is given to pull levers, the more oversight that person has. Not just anyone can open a business and call themself a doctor, for instance. Does this same logic apply to property? One person has a house that if confiscated would house 3 people in a poorer neighborhood. Should a random person make that decision?
If I'm on a train track that's because I know where the train is. I don't need anyone "helping" the situation by sending a train my way just because 3 idiots don't know where the train is.