What Would You Do?

What would you do? (See below for scenario details)


  • Total voters
    14
lol, jus playing devils advocate since some determinists/materialist think free-will a fallacy, an illusion.
 
"

Consider this: In the grand scheme of things those 200 people would have died sooner or later anyway (everyone dies). But if you change the tracks, you are directly responsible for the death of the little girl. While the death of the 200 people in the train is not caused by you (or is it?)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





SG + Alex + Native + Thomas



@ SG

Hey hey hey, no breaking the rules!! "You can only allow the train to fall off the cliff, or save it by killing/sacrificing the little girl."

Then whomever is being inflexible with the rules when there is a viable alternative available is responsible for any deaths that occur.
 
SG + Postmaster+ Native


@ SG

:eek::eek::eek: That's it, your disqualified !!! (j/k). Seriously though, I didn't create the scenario, I remember they asked us this in philosophy 101 during our introduction to Utilitarianism (which I frekkin hate!).

@ PM

Superman's got a kid now man... can't expect 'em to fly around helpin people and stuff.... He's got diaper duty to attend to.

@ Native

Not all determinists are materialists dude, (not sure if that is what you were implying). "Idealism" in philosophy (not the popular definition) can also be deterministic, that is closer to my position I think. Its interesting though that they are both polar opposites...
 
I have the privilege of not having to answer the poll so I won't! However for the sake of this thread, I would exhaust every option possible to save everyone. If I can't I'll call for superman.

There is no superman though :) And the fact is no one can save everyone lol........ That's life.

"@ Alex

Its one thing to sacrifice your own life for 200 people (which does not really pose a "dilemma" at all)... but in this case you are not sacrificing yourself, but you are making that choice for someone else.

I still see no dilemma...(it's just numbers.....) The kid dies.... And they have had a great honour bestowed upon them..... Most people die pointless deaths after a bs life..... This kid is dying for a real cause.... They should be smiling as that train impacts with their cranium, good death sir... good, death.


C0de.... IF you KNOW that this train is going to X and there are 200 people on it... and they will die..... Then yes, I believe you are responsible for their deaths...

--EDIT--

LMAO!! who voted for letting the train run off the cliff? Reason?
 
SG + Postmaster+ Native


@ SG

:eek::eek::eek: That's it, your disqualified !!! (j/k). Seriously though, I didn't create the scenario, I remember they asked us this in philosophy 101 during our introduction to Utilitarianism (which I frekkin hate!).

@ PM

Superman's got a kid now man... can't expect 'em to fly around helpin people and stuff.... He's got diaper duty to attend to.

@ Native

Not all determinists are materialists dude, (not sure if that is what you were implying). "Idealism" in philosophy (not the popular definition) can also be deterministic, that is closer to my position I think. Its interesting though that they are both polar opposites...

:D you mean those big white brutes that 'bear' solace on top of a white artic cap?
thought superman was a synoym for the 'the man up top' but got worried when you said his son was in diapers!;)
ok then what we need is a self sacrificing martyr who jumps in front of the train at the junction stopping it in its tracks before the next scenario unfolds- free will of a suicidal depressive there at the right time at the right place 'everything happens for a reason' - happy?:)
 
I'd adjust the junction control so that the train would derail before going off of the cliff or hitting the girl.

Indeed, there is always an alternative. :)

FF makes a very good point - the logical outcome would be to sacrifice the little girl for the people on the train - but in doing so, you directly cause the death of somebody by your own actions. The question contains that extra level of depth that is easy to overlook.
 
Alex + Native


@ Alex


The counter argument to your point is this: once man assumes this power, he will always manipulate the "numbers" to suit his own interests, his own good. For example: that is exactly the type of numbers the people in the Pentagon and the boardrooms "calculated" before launching their global wars. This one basic fact of life is responsible for everything from empires collapsing to why no individual can truly be morally "good", that's what makes this question complex (extremely complex akshully).


@ Native

lol dude, I was referring to that crap of a new superman movie... and as for them suicidal depressives... I think they're on to something, so i kinda sympathize. ;)
 
A wise man once said... "You have to be a really low down p.o.s to get into politics." I hold value in his words lol... So I couldn't respond or anything about a pentagon and boardrooms and launching global wars lol this has nothing to do with that... You asked me a quesiton about a train and a girl... The girl dies.... Because I evaluate that to be the best route. One girl's life although I cannot judge a price of it.... Although.. lol. It cannot be more than 200 others lives. Not looking to debate it, and not looking to be "morally good" Just taking the route with the least damage. You wanted people to answer your question, there is my answer :D It shall not change.
 
@ Alex

thats totally kool man... I understand your reasoning... On paper, your choice is the "right" one.... its just that... there's a profound problem behind all of this that just screws with your head if you think about it...
 
Enlighten me ;) What is meant to screw with my head... Cause my conscience is clear :S

Well, maybe your conscience should be clear... maybe the reason mine isn't is because I am not "thinking right"... or maybe I am and that's why its not...


...i need some tea...
 
now, what we SAY we would do and what we would actually do are 2 different things altogether.......
i dont know for sure, what i would do...most likely try to save the girl because i wouldnt be thinking that the train would go over...

but honestly i think most people would jump off the freaking train and save themselves.
 
oh, imnot saying it would be the right thing todo, ijust reckon, i would try to save the girl, and hope the best for the train... i just dont think the right way sometimes, is all.
 

@ Alex


There is just something about the idea of man making such calculations and creating his own definition of what is "good" and what is "bad" in the proccess that bothers me... There is a deeper issue here I think...
 
my first post was meant to say, that saying what you would do, (no matter how difficult the decision) and ACTUALLY doing it, can be 2 different things. We do not know how we will react in a crisis situation, until it happens.
so, my answer still stands..

i dont know what i would do, perhaps try to save the girl..

but,,, Id probably jump off the train.
 
@ Alex

There is just something about the idea of man making such calculations and creating his own definition of what is "good" and what is "bad" in the proccess that bothers me... There is a deeper issue here I think...

Oh ok, I get where you are coming from now... But, one thing... We've been doing it for years. Some may even say we've even gone, higher than this and manifested a being which is even more supreme than man and then again said what is good and bad. what is right what is wrong what is just what isn't what is righteous what is damned lol..

oh, imnot saying it would be the right thing todo, ijust reckon, i would try to save the girl, and hope the best for the train... i just dont think the right way sometimes, is all.

Fair enough!! Just curious! Juuuuuust curious!
 
Back
Top