Monday, November 24, 2008

A Hypothetical Situation

Imagine you are standing by a train track. The track leads up to a hill in the distance. You look at the hill and see an evil man with a mustache up there with an empty train car. He pushes the train car down the hill and it is quickly gaining momentum while the evil man cackles maniacally. You look the other direction and see the track splits into two tracks. You see that on one path the evil man tied five completely random people and on the other one he has tied two completely random people. That is when you notice that in front of you is the switch to direct the path of the train to one side of the track or the other.
What do you do? Do you push the switch so that the train is directed to hit the two people, the five people, or do you choose to not make a choice and let fate take its course?

Some people say that there is inherent evil in making a decision, such as choosing to kill someone. It is evil no matter what and if you push the switch one direction or the other, it is a very serious crime.
Others believe that decisions themselves are not evil, but the intent behind them dictates the evilness of the act. They say it is better for fewer people to die than a whole group of people. They may also argue that it is completely irresponsible to not make a choice when the opportunity is given to you.


Now, let's make it a little bit more complicated. There is a extremely fat man standing next to the track.
You know that if you give the fat man a little nudge, he will fall across the track and when he is hit by the train, the train will only kill him and the people tied to the track will be saved. Would you push the fat man? If you do, only one person would die instead of many.

When you think about it, choosing to push the fat man on the track is essentially the same thing as choosing to move the switch in one direction or the other--you are in effect making a decision that will kill a person or persons.

What do you do?

3 comments:

Chris said...

I think you have a responsibility to save as many people as you can. That is saying the same thing as killing the fewest, but if you look at the situation inversely, it is asking whether you would rather save 5 lives or two lives by flipping a switch. I think everyone would prefer to save more lives. That one is at the expense of the other is sad, but it doesn't change the situation.
Also, pushing the big guy is also sad, but you would save seven lives.
HOWEVER, it would be immoral. Using people as a means to an end is not okay. It would be better to choose to kill the two people than to throw the single person on the tracks.
I am pretty sure this is right too. Maybe I will yoink your idea for my blog.

Lisa Lou said...

hm. interesting. I'm never very good at ethics because I always get super sad. What if the 5 random people are evil as well? What if the 2 random people are pregnant women? If it was for reals, I probably wouldn't do anything, not because I think that it is better for fate to choose, but because I would be so scared I would probably forget what to do.

Anna said...

Actually, this happened to me the other day. And I just flipped the switch to kill only the two people.
I feel pretty good about my choice.