So Sup Forums do you pull the lever?

So Sup Forums do you pull the lever?

Other urls found in this thread:

strawpoll.me/10869693
youtube.com/watch?v=y5tx0pe24II
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

No, I want to set free this world full of faggots, also kill the other guy by my own

WHATS THE NAME OF THAT FUQIN MOVIE. IT HAS THIS SCENARIOS LIKE THIS,BUT ITS ALSO LIKE A CLASS OF PHILOSOPHY?STUDENTS.

what color are the people?

agreed. dont pull the lever and let the other dude rot.

>Inb4 multi track drifting

The lever is already pulled, idiot.

The tram doesn't seem to be moving, pulling it will do nothing.

Nope. if you do nothing then you have no blame, it's the trolley operator's fault for running over 5 people. If you pull it, then you are to blame for that one person's death. Lack of action = no responsibility. Taking action = responsibility.

Naw I don't want to get involved in that situation.

I know what your talking about. They end up in a bomb shelter and shit. Idk the name

The obvious answer

Though really there is no real way of telling the correct answer, your best bet would be to just distance yourself from the lever to avoid any legal liability.

push the lever mid-distance, make the trolley derail and possibly kill the trolley operator.

Not pulling the lever is in itself an action

Letting people die when you are perfectly able to save them is killing them.

Killing = Letting die

Killing 1 person > Killing 5 people

Any more like this?

Who am I to put one beings life above another's?

Fuck. That movie looks sick as fuck. I only got to see like 5mins of it.

You're a dumbass. If I don't pull the lever, you're comparing it to if I had taken an axe and cut off all 5 of those guys' heads myself. You can't put liability on someone for refusing to take action, especially with the potential for legal consequences for taking action.

In some versions the single person is someone you know (friend/family) while the other 5 are strangers

It doesnt matter. You can't win.

This is for ethical purposes jackass not fucking court room law.

Also you say there is a difference between letting them die and killing them. How?

Both killing them and letting them die results in 5 dead people. Your actions the the cause of there deaths.

You're confusing actions and decisions.

Besides, who fucking cares? I'd rather jump on the tracks myself and die first.

Lack of action is not an action though. If you do nothing, you have no personal recourse.

How do I even know which track it's on before I pull? I might make it worse.

I abstain, courteously.

What about the actions leading up to the people being in the scenario? I'm fine with letting it be

Of course this doesn't apply if you want to not include context and look at this for individual morals and ethics.

>Lack of action is not an action though
False
ac·tion
ˈakSH(ə)n/
noun
1.
the fact or process of doing something, typically to achieve an aim.
"he vowed to take tougher action against persistent offenders"
synonyms: measures, steps, activity, movement, work, operation
"the need for local community action"

>Doing something
Not pulling the lever means you are leaving the the lever in the default state.

Therefore you are acting

You do have personal recourse

could you restate this?

I guess thats the important question here.

If this were purely a thought experiment this wouldn't apply

But who am I to take action without knowing what may have caused the people to be tied to the track? What if the 5 are cartel members?

...

I guess all you could do is make an assessment of the situation and do the best of your ability to minimize killing.

So you'd be fine with killing the one? Even in a situation in which you know the five are murderers?

Not that user, but no. That's not how it works
Lack of something is nothing
If you arent commiting an action than youre not doing anything, hence not pulling the lever.
>Doing nothing=no action

If I knew the 5 were murders and they would in fact kill more people I would let them die because keeping them alive could result even more deaths.

However if I didn't know anything about the people I would let the five live because statistically the chance of them being murders is low.

I proved myself all you said "No that is wrong" with no explanation. All of your other crap is just restating your point. Comeback with an argument.

the abstaining from action (not pulling lever) is in fact an action or active choice. you do one or you do the other, you're not doing nothing.

>If you arent commiting an action than youre not doing anything, hence not pulling the lever.
>If you are not committing an action
This is what you are trying to prove to me

>Than you are not doing anything=Not pulling the lever
Your initial premise

There isn't connection from your premise to your conclusion

...

Are you willing to concede from your position or do you have a rebuttal?

OP is trying to determine if we're a bunch of psychopath.

And is not able to ask the question properly.
A thing know as "OP is a faggot"

now that's finally some science

Sorry knowledge of the question was implied.

Unless you are a faggot who needs to lurk moar

Kek

pull it halfway and derail it...

What does he do?

nothing they will all just walk away from the tracks

strawpoll.me/10869693
If you vote to not pull the lever and you are serous explain

>Pull lever
>Pull out knife and cut the rope
>He maybe loses his legs because I didn't get far enough, but all people are alive

Do you guys seriously not carry pocket knives on you?

Yes. Is this the Benghazi paradox?

Usually there is another part to the question which says that the single person is your beloved. In that case I wouldn't pull the lever. I don't know those five strangers so I don't care about them. Their lives have no value to my life and they only coincide with my life in this single moment. By not pulling the lever I am not actively killing them while also saving the person I love. It's not my fault the operator didn't stop the train on his own he is the true murderer.

ha

How are you not actively killing them?

I mean I can understand killing 5 random people to save a love one, but sugar coating it to unburden yourself is blatantly false

also you are technically murdering them. Murder is premeditated (you purposefully decide to kill them.) If the operator couldn't not stop the train it is not his fault because it is out of his ability to decide their fates.

The burden never lied on me it lied on the operator. My lack of action led to their death but ultimately it is the operator who is truly at fault. He actively ran those people over by not stoping the train himself. All trains have breaks. And his options outweighed mine. In my scenario someone was bound to die in his scenario he could have prevented my decision and any deaths. It's like the saying "don't kill a butterfly in the past" or however it goes.

/thread

A real head-scratcher.

The the sake of the thought experiment he is incapable of stopping in time.

This is how the problem was designed.

now you combined two problems

its your defntion of original
>as soon as one piece gets replaced it´s not original
then no
>it´s still the train whose parts got switched
then yes

Lost and saved.

People lie all the time in court. I wouldn't admit to premeditation. Another user said above that you can't hold someone liable for not taking any action especially if there is a legality issue. When it really comes down to it I don't care about those lived and not taking action is the best action in a legal sense and moral sense. Those strangers lives don't outweigh the person I love. You can make the same argument if you pull the lever too and it would be easier for the prosecution. "Your actions show that you consciously made the decision to pull the lever you can not deny your actions, your act of pulling the lever is what ultimately led to this persons death." In my case it would be much easier to defend my lack of action because there is no concrete evidence as to what truly went on in my mind moments before whereas there is concrete evidence of pulling the lever.

>headscratcher
With a 1000 mile distance murder wont matter considering that's more than enough time to have someone near the man get him off the tracks

The best one I have ever seen

youtube.com/watch?v=y5tx0pe24II
this song, kill em all.

...

But facebook is down, therefore there is no way of contacting emergency services.

The question is whether or not lack of action is tantamount to murder. If it is you are a hypocrite when you pull the lever, and the only way to avoid that is devoting your life entirely to saving other lives, as there are surely those you can save and to do otherwise would be murder.

dont hire operators that have nearsightedness.

no it isn't, neutrality is a lack of action, they die from inaction, so it is not the same in anyway shape or form.

I'll send a carrier pigeon

enjoy the view

i'd choose someone i like over 1000 strangers

Autistic edgy faggots. Kill yourself, autism no die.

They don't die from inaction. They die from: A.physics and B.biology. Roughly in that order. Interpretation over the guilt of the lever person is inconsequential. Physics or biology gets everyone eventually.

If we are simply talking about a moral issue and you choose to save your love one (which I might even do) you are simply just an immoral person.

Stop adjusting the thought experiment to fit your conclusion

Also let me entertain the your thought the operator could of prevented this. The operator is going to kill either 1 person or 5 people. You have the ability to stop 1 person from dying or 5. If don't pull the lever you are allowing him to kill 5 people. Therefore helping him. This would make it so you are killing them (while the operator is also killing them.) So both of you are to blame.

People are immoral. A perfectly moral person would have to do this. How does this disprove anything?

Read thread.

So what would you do then Faggot?

Push the fatty very hard so he end up behind the five

Then this would conclude to there being no such thing as morality. If this were true it wouldn't matter if you went out and murdered thousands of people.

>>simply just an immoral person

I would make the opposite argument. One person I care about is worth much more good to me the the lives of 5 strangers. It would be immoral to choose the lessor good.

Acting like self interest is inherently bad is ridiculous.

if you take no course of action you are not responsible, walking away and just accepting that you are not responsible for anything is the best course of action.

I mean... there isn't such a thing as morality. It's completely made up by us. If a person decides they aren't responsible one way or another for the outcome and walks away they aren't any more or less wrong than someone who says they are morally obligated to save the larger group.

Well if your suffering was more than the suffering of the 5 peoples love ones then yes you are not immoral however this would be unlikely

Wow dude if it was going for the one guy then i would fucking pull the lever and then jump on the tracks

Exactly. There is a difference between self interest and selfishness. Saving the person you love is self interest. It would be selfish to completely disregard a person who you know and love for your selfish decision to save five others because of "OMG will I look good if I save these five people hur dur"

...

deja vu

Well for the sake of the thought experiment lets keep the discussion within our made up idea of morality

insufficient data

/thread

pull the lever on the person tied up

It would also be more selfish to completely disregard 5 people for the sake of you losing a love one

It's no ones responsibility to pull the lever

dont pull lever push last guy out of way

such a shit movie

If you can pull the lever it is your responsibility

My suffering is inherently weighted as more important to me than that of others. That is undeniable. Since it's my decision to make and the result is that I could suffer greatly, or I could suffer a comparatively small amount, choosing less suffering is the moral decision in my eyes.

Fucking not pull the lever man, that looper dooper looks totally radical man.

...

...

Why?

All other things equal then, I'd pull it. It takes no effort and the result is statistically better.