2 ms·
We like arguing in hypotheticals here on HN so lets bring a modified trolley problem into the discussion: This modified version has the trolley heading steady
by runarberg 5y ago
We like arguing in hypotheticals here on HN so lets bring a modified trolley problem into the discussion:
This modified version has the trolley heading steady on course to the next station, there is nobody on the track and nothing will happen if you leave it alone. However you stand next to a lever, and if you pull the lever you will divert the trolley and it will hit 200 people (some are criminals but most aren’t). You have ample time to think it over. If the trolley passes, you still have the option to pull the lever and the next trolley will hit those 200 people. You know full well what happens if you pull the lever. You also know you will not be punished if you do.
Say you are an observer in this modified version, and you observe me pulling the lever. 200 people are now unessisary dead because of my action. Do you consider me a cold blooded murderer?
- three14 5y agoThis is not a good-faith simplification of the situation in Gaza.
- runarberg 5y agoI know its not, that was sort of the point here. I made sure to qualify this with arguing in hypotheticals before coming up with the scenario. Starting this sub-thread with a debate about what makes a cold blooded murder is another way of taking the debate into arguing hypotheticals and is not a good-faith tactic. What I did here is simply taking the bait and continuing to the logical next step.