New Prey game by Arkane has memes in it

New Prey game by Arkane has memes in it
Are you happy?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

That's not a meme, that's a very widely asked philosophical question.

This is a meme?

>Are you happy?
no

it's been well over a decade since i was happy

What is the downside of switching the track?
Do some people think that 5 people dying instead of 1 is better because they won't have to touch the switcher and bear no responsibility?

Some people truly believe that.

Yes?

You are responsible for doing nothing.

yes, people will do anything to excuse themselves of having a guilty conscience

its just not funny without a crudely drawn man holding on a lever

no
its pretty well known in philosophy and other liberal arts jedi mind trick bullshit classes and degrees

iirc picking either labels you a murderer

picking the 5(stay on track is the choice iirc) means you're willing to get it over with and don't care of the consequences

picking 1 means you're more about sacrificing for the greater good

and doing nothing labels you helpless

The point of the problem is that weighing lives like a math equation is pointless. Either decision is equally justifiable depending on your personal philosophy and morality.

Doing nothing IS picking the 5.

>(((some people))) believe that

women believe that.

This.
The edits make it even better.

again its been decades but it was essentially knowing you are doing nothing , knowing you are on track and switching tracks to save 5

so doing nothing was helplessness

Nah. 1 person dying is objectively better than 5 people dying

It's an exercise to see how your mind attaches empiric value to a human life.

You are retarded
Psychologically, doing nothing implies something different than "helplessness" in this situation.

What if those 5 people then get up and go on a killing spree?

Only retards would judge them for it. I am fine with being judged by retards if i can remain consistent with my own principles.
Tip tip fuck normies mlady.

If you don't switch the track then it's not your fault you did nothing
If you switched the track then you made a decision and have to live with it
Never make decisions

>it is OK to kill 5 people instead of 1
you have to have some pretty fucked up morals to believe that

it's not a philosophical dilemma, it's an ethics test. If you choose to let 5 people get killed rather than act and have only 1 person killed, you fail the test. You're a bad person


an actual philosophical dilemma would be the same problem only the 1 person on the second track is your spouse/parent/child and the 5 people on the first track are strangers

why has no one ever thought of switching tracks while train is crossing in an attempt to derail it. That way you can honestly say you tried you best regardless of outcome

>that's a very widely asked philosophical question
So it is a meme.

Who cares, they shouldn't have allowed themselves to be tied to the track to begin with.

at that point you let the strangers die because one can be a cereal rapist , a whore , a maniac etc..

you made the decision not to flip it


there's no argument against this. you're just wrong and suffer from an inability to be responsible for things other people won't like. it's a fear of judgement.

Well yeah, but the details of what kind of people are on each track is a different question.

Have you ever seen what happens when train derails?

>switching the tracks
The 5 people could be a bunch of hobos and the 1 could be the guy who will go on to cure cancer or something

What if the one person set it up to begin with?

Post some serious moral dilemmas.

>american education

>objectively
Well spooked my boy

well its just a small trolley, cant be that bad

Seriously. What a missed opportunity.

If you didn't switch tracks then you made the decision to do nothing when you had the ability to do so.
You had the ability to save five lives. You chose not to.
You were aware of the consequences. You chose to do nothing. You were not helpless in this situation. You had a choice.

What the fuck am i reading

a strawmanning of the Libertarian position

A fairly funny one tho

>and the snake specifically requestet that you do not tread on him

>not rapidly switching the track back and forth so you can't be sure which track it will go down

Dovie'andi se tovya sagain

>you made the decision not to flip it
I did, but it wasn't me who set it up, so focusing on me is part of ignoring the real perpetrator and the issue. If I don't have any investment in any of those 6 people (including the possible repercussions of their deaths that may affect me), why should I care that the lives of 5 are more valuable than the life of 1. Statistically it may be more beneficial, in reality I don't give a shit. Almost everyone has the ability to save lives at any point of time, not in this direct way, but still.

Well four to be fair

Either decision is fine. Not all lives are equal. With no further knowledge of the individuals at risk, there is no way to say which decision will have the better outcome.

Flip it or not, you're not a bad person.

>not putting the switch in half-switched position so the train goes of the tracks and kills nobody or everybody

train machinist has a higher chance of survival in derailment than a guy getting ran over. Logically its the best choice

switch the track
then run over and untie the one guy before the train reaches him
everyone lives

That's why this is a philosophical question. There is no right answer without having more details.

>With no further knowledge of the individuals at risk, there is no way to say which decision will have the better outcome.
Statistically, you can be almost 95% sure that killing five people is worse than killing one.

Doesn't matter. You are still at fault for the decision. The person rigging it up is also at fault. Much more so than you but you still had the conscious choice. Nobody is ever free of consequence and your nihilism isn't going to shield you from said consequences.

Not to mention hitting someone tied to the tracks would probably derail the train anyway

There is a right answer exactly because there is no details.

What consequences?

I think the 5 murderers/criminals vs 1 innocent person is the more interesting question. You have to think about whether the criminals deserve a chance and whether 5 lives are still worth more than 1 in that situation. What would you guys do?

No there isn't. No details means there are unanswered questions. What if this is an execution for five criminals? What if the one guy eventually goes on to cure cancer? What if, what if, what if.

This is why it's a fucking philosophical question. Philosophies such as the greater good, all human life has value, etc come into question. You're still in high school aren't you, and that's why you know nothing about this basic shit

Now that's just moving goalposts.

One day you'll reach the real world.

really made me think

Actually, under the law, you are more likely to suffer consequences if you pull that lever as opposed to not pulling it since you actively participated in the murder of a man.

Not OP. If someone set it up, what do you mean by "fault" user?
Like court fault or moral fault?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

multi track drifting

Not multitrack driffting.

No, fuck criminals.

If said scenario did happen to you then you are not free of the consequences of the 5 people that died suing the fuck out of you and holding grudges that may lead in your possible death.
Both. someone was morally fucked up to put people in said situation and also would get life in prison for such bullshit.

>What if this is an execution for five criminals? What if the one guy eventually goes on to cure cancer?
The "what if"s is exactly adding more details.
You're supposed to make this decision quickly, without knowing who lies on the track

If it had multitrack or EYE drifting, that'd be a meme. As this thread proves, that question is actually valid.

I ain't afraid of no ghost.

If you switch the track you are now complicit in murder. Prove me wrong, philosophyfags

But we don't know whether or not those 5 people are wanted crimelords that ruin peoples lives or know if that one person is an angel walking on earth or vice versa.

The question is stupid because there isn't enough information at hand to go for a decision.

>its pretty well known in philosophy and other liberal arts jedi mind trick bullshit classes and degrees
>iirc picking either labels you a murderer
Being a murderer needs an active action. Doing nothing and let god/the universe do his work is not murder.
Killing someone trying to save lives is not murder either, regardless of the switch position.
Laws of most civilized countries do NOT view
>sacrifice of the few for good of the many
Star Trek BS as a valid guideline. So in practice you are free to chose which and how many lives you save.

I meant the families of the 5 people that died.
You are also complicit to murder for knowing you could have not killed those five people.
You don't win. you can't win.

It would be manslaughter at worst.

The act of not choosing is a choice in itself
If you choose to save one or five lives is another question altogether

Its not moving goalposts when he isn't trying to make a point about the initial problem. He very clearly states that he is bringing up a separate, tangentially related issue he finds more interesting.... twat.

Nobody ever explores part 2 of this thought experiment:

A brilliant transplant surgeon has five patients, each in need of a different organ, each of whom will die without that organ. Unfortunately, there are no organs available to perform any of these five transplant operations. A healthy young traveler, just passing through the city the doctor works in, comes in for a routine checkup. In the course of doing the checkup, the doctor discovers that his organs are compatible with all five of his dying patients. Suppose further that if the young man were to disappear, no one would suspect the doctor. Do you support the morality of the doctor to kill that tourist and provide his healthy organs to those five dying persons and save their lives?


Same idea. Five people were about to die, now they're not. One person wasn't going to die, now they will. Kill the one, amirite?

>You are still at fault for the decision
I think you don't understand. I accept that it was my decision, I don't see any fault in it. You are projecting the consequences, while there are none possible, none unless you create them. It's not nihilism, because there's no half-assed nihilism. I'm not a nihilist for not flipping the switch, in both cases your moral systems are broken and both cases result in some death. There's a responsibility in both cases, but in one you blindly assume that 5 people lives you don't know are worth more than some other guy's life and in other you just don't do anything. If I was scared of judgement so much, I'd kill myself right there. I'm not less empathetic for doing nothing than you for killing 1 guy.

Infamous had a similar scenario, where you could either save your girlfriend or five doctors

Unless you live in a shithole "failure to assist" is a crime.

>Being a murderer needs an active action.
Actually, is quite a lot wrong about this statement. And there are things and cases were inactivity is just as punishable as taking an action, including criminal negligence, refusal to report a crime, refusal to offer help where it's needed. Seeing a car wreck, people still sitting in, calling for help, and you ignoring that and just driving on can get you into prison, at least where I live.

>Killing someone trying to save lives is not murder either
That is very much wrong as well.


Let's make one thing clear here. First of all, the trolley problem does not have a RIGHT solution. That is why it's such a notorious problem, and evergreen of philosophical discussions.

>traveler that disappears during checkup wouldn't cause suspicion for the doctor
No point killing the vagrant, his druggy organs will end up killing the rest despite your claims of his health.

If you flip the switch you are murderer and a communist.

Pull the switch half way causing the track to be misaligned and cause it to derail.

It's pretty simple, and you only kill the 40 people on board. Their fates were sealed the moment I was asked to decide though, so there is nothing to be done about it.

What if i'm not near the switch but i get my legs broken as I want to switch the tracks
>one of the 5 people gets revenge by murdering a lot more people
b-but i saved him with the other four!

...

>it's not a philosophical dilemma, it's an ethics test. If you choose to let 5 people get killed rather than act and have only 1 person killed, you fail the test. You're a bad person
You pull the switch.
>The train derails and kills all six people.
The "test" is about you assuming to predict best/worse outcome, while in reality you cannot predict anything.
A real world example of this is shooting down a hijacked passenger plane en route to a stadium.

What if that 1 person is your mom/dad/brother/sister and those 5 other people are child molesters?

Doesn't look like a meme to me

The original problem questions whether or not 5 lives are equivalent to 1 and your moral ethics regarding intervention.
His problem puts victims in contrast, therefore showing that there is a viable choice..
That's not part two. That's a different spin.

anyone got the one with plato and socretes?

I suppose in your fantasy scenario you are correct? I don't see how this relates to what anyone in this thread is discussing however.

>"failure to assist" is a crime

Nigger, that's barely even a tort.

>You are projecting the consequences, while there are none possible.
There is Consequences to everything you do and don't do. That is a fact.
You being uncaring is a form of nihilism.

Get over it.

The best solution obviously is to pull the switch and hop on a trolley as it passes you

The lives of criminals aren't worth shit to me, especially if they were going to die anyway. I'm not going to take an action to kill an innocent person and save any amount of human garbage.

The catch is that if you choose to pull the lever, you find that it's broken and does nothing. You never had control over the situation at all.

Five people die. Doctors are there to save lives, not take them.

What if it was the conductor's plan all along.

...

An analogy for modern gaming and choices, isn't that like cutting off your nose to spite your face?