The Trolley Dilemma

Golden Retriever Trading

Golden Retriever Trading

Scenario 1) You are the trolley conductor and your trolley is going down the main track and the breaks are broken. On the main track, there are 5 people. There is a track that veers to the left with 1 person on that track. Either the 5 people, or the 1 that is on the side track will be killed. You have the choice to pull a lever to take the trolley off the main track killing the 1, or leave the trolley going to kill the 5 workers in front of you. What do you do?

image-20160411-6225-19epmm5.png


Scenario 2) You are standing on a bridge and see a trolley coming heading towards 5 people standing on the track. Next to you is a man that if you push on the tracks, could stop the trolley saving the 5 people. What do you do?

image-20160411-6211-64clrp.png


Assume all conditions are fixed, i.e. don't put in variables like honking the horn, yelling, or coming up with possibilities that the people may move. It's basically 1 person or 5 people must die.
 
Is this a trick question?
Scenario one pull the lever.
Scenario two you'll need to hire a lawyer for manslaughter if you push someone off the bridge no matter how well intended.
 
It's really a false dichotomy. To suggest that the trolley is close enough to represent immediate danger to persons on the track and you're between them is an implicit acknowledgement that people on the track are within earshot. Which means there's more options on the table than just pulling a lever or doing nothing.

The fundamental premise is also flawed in that the question is posed in terms of rational choice when the reality of such a situation would be panic. It's not a far stretch to liken this to back-testing vs. actually making the trade--though to a much greater degree in the trolley dilemma.

But in either case, inaction is the answer because you're not complicit in someone's death.
 
beerntrading said:
It's really a false dichotomy. To suggest that the trolley is close enough to represent immediate danger to persons on the track and you're between them is an implicit acknowledgement that people on the track are within earshot. Which means there's more options on the table than just pulling a lever or doing nothing.

The fundamental premise is also flawed in that the question is posed in terms of rational choice when the reality of such a situation would be panic. It's not a far stretch to liken this to back-testing vs. actually making the trade--though to a much greater degree in the trolley dilemma.

But in either case, inaction is the answer because you're not complicit in someone's death.
More...

There was a previous ET thread for the exactly same topic.

Inaction is not the best option, imo.

Probably the best option would be calling 911 immediately. Asking the 911 to contact the train's controller and driver to see for any possible actions anyone of them could take.

Rather than doing nothing. The phone call could also prove your timing and distance from the scene, in order to avoid any misunderstanding of even potentially criminal acts by you. Causing death by your acts.

The kind of optionally taking actions causing deaths of others of which their family members could get you in trouble in the future, according to your statements later given to the authority.

Also, emergency ambulance hence could get there much earlier, because of your call, in order to possibly save lives.
 
Last edited:
A Moral Dilemma
https://elitetrader.com/et/threads/a-moral-dilemma.13466/
daniel_m said:
A railway line branches and on each branch the line runs into a tunnel. there is a run-away train on the line approaching the point where it branches.
As the points are now set, the train will run into a tunnel in which there are five children playing. They have no reason to expect a trian since this branch is rarely used; if the train enteres the tunnel they will certainly be killed.
The train cannot be stopped.
You can, however, divert it, sending it down the other branch, into the other tunnel. But in this tunnel there is one man working - that is why the points were set to send the train into the first tunnel - and he will certainly die if the train enters the tunnel.

Should you divert the train?

[borrowed from an essay by Phillippa Foot]
More...
 
That " The run-away t rain cannot be stopped. " and "five children " could be much more complicate .

Saving the 5 children would be a better option, imo, as one of them could be one day the future US President. The number of 5 children could have 5 times more contributions in the next 100 years, than only 1 adult workman.

This option could be also an acceptable option agreeable by the workman, too! Potentially! And traditionally (cf Titanic)!

Whether the train being a non-stoppable run-away one may not be the issue, as he should not have known that in advance.

Therefore he still should call 911 immediately for emergency ambulance soonest. Explaining via the 911 call what he was going to do too, if no any further/better instruction from the 911 station!
 
Last edited:
Here4money said:
Whichever choice kills the most people standing on the tracks, because I'd want to improve the gene pool.
More...

Probably there should be another modified version for those people were repair/maintenance workers carrying out emergence repairing work in order to save the whole train including many passengers, under extremely heavily bad weather.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top