MissySassy
959
35
4
May 24, 2025 2:34 AM
MissySassy
959
35
4
friendsofsandwiches
kadunk kadunk kadunk kadunk....
diggerwoods
Life is just one trolley problem after another if you think about it.
Rainbowdaesh
thegoodowl
Accurate
andydicktracymorganfairchild
The trolley problem isn't a problem, why is it even a thing, it would be insane to let the train kill four more people than necessary, and yet it shows up on the internet all the time. Why.
TheChlorineAddict
The flavor of the problem I’ve heard is kill multiple people you don’t know or one that you do.
Implied that the one person is someone you’d otherwise rather not run down with a trolly. This makes it a less arbitrary than a one vs four problem.
Mechwarrior719
Imagine not understanding a philosophical exercise and admitting on the internet.
It goes like this: Should you cause one person to die to save five or do you cause the death of five through inactivity?
Alternatively: Should the driverless vehicle drive into oncoming traffic or run over a pedestrian?
andydicktracymorganfairchild
I understand it, it's not hard to understand. I just think it asks a stupid question. As I said, it would be insane to let the train kill four more people than necessary. The answer seems obvious.
Whatdoyousaytoanicecupoftea
The extension is....if that one person was going to develop a cure for cancer (for example)... would you still kill them, or the other four?
andydicktracymorganfairchild
That changes the conditions of the problem so much that it is not the same problem. When it was random people on both tracks, it was apparently intended to illustrate the question of whether or not a lack of deliberate action excuses the potential track shifter from responsibility for the deaths of 4 extra people, which is, I maintain, a stupid question. But this new question does not require the matter of inaction, and is instead only about whether to kill 4 randos or 1 cancer boi.
mafiacarstarter
Yes, but where *exactly* is the line?
What *exactly* would be needed for the one person to be more important or valuable than 4 people?
This is one of those things that helps you find out about yourself, as well as finding out about others.
Going with the knee-jerk "of course the answer is clear and you're stupid for asking" shows a whole lot more about you than it does about philosophy.
Whatdoyousaytoanicecupoftea
No it doesn't. You have no apriori knowledge. It's a "could".