3 ms·

Yes, the alternative could be more car driving which “emits CO₂ killing 12 people over 30 years”.

• onion2k 4y ago
  Or people walk instead, emitting no carbon and killing zero people... This is what's fascinating about the Trolley Problem, and philosophy in general, and how it applies outside of philosophy - most people struggle to answer questions based on the evidence available without bringing in some external justification for their answer. People wamt a 'logical' reason to justify their choice. They can't say "I don't know", or "I used the limited data I had" when the choice they'd make goes against the something they belive about the real world (eg 'public transport is good'). They bring in a "but what if <imaginary thing that supports their biases>!" and make a decision based on that instead. They even believe they made the right choice. This applies to everything from choosing a tech stack to picking who to vote for. It's infuriating once you see it.
  • Dylan16807 4y ago
    It's a pretty huge assumption to say that walking is fast enough.