Thursday, March 22, 2012

[PL 431] The Trolley Problem

Here are two scenarios known collectively as the Trolley Problem:


  1. Switch. A runaway trolley is going to kill four people working on the tracks. You can flip a switch and divert the trolley, but it will kill one person. Should you flip the switch?
  2. Fat Man. A runaway trolley is going to kill four people working on the tracks. You can stop the trolley by pushing a fat man off a bridge onto the tracks. Should you push the fat man?
Research shows that, in response to scenario 1, most people say that they would flip the switch, whereas, in response to scenario 2, most people say that they would not push the fat man.

Now, from a utilitarian point of view, this result seems rather puzzling. For, presumably, the reason to flip the switch in scenario 1 is that only one person will die instead of four (in other words, it is morally good to sacrifice one person to save four). But, in scenario 2, it is also the case that one person will die instead of four. Why is "sacrifice one to save four" a good reason to flip the switch in scenario 1 but not a good reason to push the fat man in scenario 2?

12 comments:

  1. I do not think there is any difference between scenario one and scenario two. Regardless of if you pull a lever or push a fat man, the results are still the same: an innocent man dies. I immediately think about that man's life; does he have a wife? kids? Who am I to decide that he doesn't get to be around for their lives?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think overall a lot of people agree with the people in the video saying that they would pull the lever to save the four people and kill only one. At the same token people would say they wouldn't want to have an input on people dying so they would just let the trolley go on its course. I understand both sides, but I am a believer in doing what serves the greater amount of good, so I would pull the lever to change the trolley's direction.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I believe most people would say something along the lines of: pushing the fat man is punishing an innocent bystander. Moreover, they would argue that you are more physically committed in scenario 2 (pushing with your own two hands) than in scenario 1 (flipping a switch). However, I would argue that in scenario 1, the lone worker is just as innocent as the fat man. Moreover, I think most people easily overlook that fact that in scenario 2, we are assuming that pushing the fat man 100% guarantees the lives of the 4 individuals.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I chose to save 4 men and sacrifice the 1 in both scenarios. The reasoning behind this is the utilitarian one, the good of the many outweighs the good of the few. In class, even if you do nothing, you are essentially choosing to kill 4 people. Most people had an issue with the thought of being responsible for other people's demise, but this was the predicament presented to them unfortunately. And when the scenario presented was you had to physically push a fat man off the edge to save 4, the vote swung drastically in favor of NOT pushing the fat man off, and killing the 4, which i thought was proposterous. When one chooses to NOT push the fat man off, one is choosing to kill 4 men, and I think this predicament was what made the class most uncomfortable and what made the votes vary.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think the reason people change their minds about the situation is that the second scenario is more directly involved since you have to kill the fat man instead of just pulling a lever. People might think that it's ok to sacrifice one person to save 4, but when they have to physically kill the person themselves they'd rather not take that responsibility. In the case of flipping a switch, we are more removed from the actual murder, even though the end result is the same.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think the reason two scenarios are different is because the second scenario involves you to physically put someone into mortal danger while the first scenario was not physical and was done indirectly. Also, the fat man was not exposed to any danger while railroad workers were. Although there is 100% guarantee that the fat man will stop the train, I think people will consider pushing him as an act of murder.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that it is because we can’t put human traits on a switch. A switch in our minds is a mechanical device without feelings or emotions making it easier for us to make the decision of physically putting our own hands on it to alter what was to pass (4 human beings being killed). But the idea of physically pushing a living human being onto the tracks in order to save 4 human beings leads us to feel as if we did something wrong. We were directly responsible for killing someone who had no reasonable expectation to be killed on a particular day in order to save the 4 track workers. My problem is that if you chose to pull the lever, then pushing the man over is essentially the same exact thing. From the start, I felt that I wouldn’t pull the lever because of my inability to fathom the value of one human life to another. Perhaps we think it is easier to explain or justify our actions of pulling a lever as opposed to pushing a human being to his/her death in order to save 4 people.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Both scenarios share the same end results... one person dies in order to save four lives. Majority would choose scenario one rather than scenario two because scenario one is less physically demanding than scenario two. In scenario one, the person is only pulling a switch and the trolley is doing the rest of the action by diverging onto another track. In scenario two, the person is physically pushing someone into the trolley which seems more demanding, but in essence is typically the same thing as pulling a lever. It may appear different, but in the end, both actions of pulling the switch and pushing the fat man cause the same results... death for one person. If I were in these situations, I think I would pull the lever, but not push the fat man because I do not think I would be able to live with the guilt of knowing that I physically pushed someone into a train. I would feel less guilty, even though pulling the lever is also pushing someone closer to their death.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I chose to pull the lever in the first scenario and not to push the fat man in the second scenario. It seem hypocritical of me because the scenarios are very similar. Sacrifice one man to save four. In the first scenario if i pull the lever one man will die but four will live. I will have to live knowing i was the cause of his death. However if i didn't pull the lever the four men will die. Then i will have to live knowing i could have saved those men. The second scenario is the same. The reason why i would not push the fat man is mostly due to how personal the situation is.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It is not an easy task to pull the lever because to some it would seem that the act of actually pulling the trigger so to speak is directly related to your action. You are directly responsible for the death of the one person standing on the tracks. With the parameters given in this scenario it may be easy to justify killing the one person to save the many but is it really that easy? In the actual situation could you pull that lever? That’s what I think about with this scenario. The scenario of pushing the fat man is an even more difficult task because I think it is an even more direct action then pulling a lever. Your direct physical contact of pushing him results in his death. Personally in both of these scenarios I wish there was an alternate way to save everyone but that’s not always the case. I guess I would agree that sometimes you need to do something that caters to the greater good, and sometimes certain sacrifices have to be made.

    ReplyDelete
  11. These scenarios continue to challenge people about what is the greater good and what is the more applicable response. I would not push the man or pull the lever. It may seem I am choosing to kill someone but actively going out of my way to change the course of what is occurring may cause more harm than good. I cannot make a value judgment and say 4 lives are more important than 1 and I wont sacrifice someone for those 4 lives either. I view it as being an observer or a participant both are guilt consuming and may not be ideal but I have to side with my better judgment and realize both scenarios are equal although the displacement of pushing someone or pulling a lever for some makes all the difference. The man being pushed is innocent and his life holds just as much value as the four men if not more because he did not take on the occupation of working in that dangerous environment. So some sense of ownership over your fate is important

    ReplyDelete
  12. In the first scenario I chose to pull the lever but in the second scenario I chose not to push the 'fat' man. The thing is both scenarios would lead to the same result. One person versus four . However, I believe pushing the man would weigh more heavily on my conscience than pulling the lever.

    ReplyDelete

This is an academic blog about critical thinking, logic, and philosophy. So please refrain from making insulting, disparaging, and otherwise inappropriate comments. Also, if I publish your comment, that does not mean I agree with it. Thanks for reading and commenting on my blog.