The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

What you think about how you think.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:38 pm

What would you DO landrew?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10058
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:24 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:What would you DO landrew?
I'd do what 99.998% of people would do. Watch in horror, unable to move.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:02 pm

Yes, that is the main import of the study. All the other issues of interest remain outside of the hypo.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:11 pm

http://rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/ ... rolley.pdf

An analysis of the trolley experiment and additional tools/values/issues/arguments that can be used.

of interest to me would be the before and after effect of group one taken off the street with no prior experience vs the same random group after its gone through various studies and debates on the issue. I assume there would be a difference in their behavior. We are a thinking species.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10551
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Poodle » Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:55 am

No, we're not bobbo. We let god decide and then we have no guilt. It has always been thus, especially when it comes to trolley problems.

User avatar
Wordbird
Poster
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Tue Aug 14, 2018 2:02 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Here is your error AGAIN for the fifth time: you add facts to the hypo: ".... I am not adding facts when I say that the five could be murderers....."===>YES, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING. Note: its five times more likely there is a murderer in the Group of Five but also five times more likely there is a person of superior virtue. See the numbers?
My point was that I'd have to be reasonably certain I'm not sacrificing a good person to save a bunch of bad ones. I will not accept a 20%, or even a 10% chance of screwing over the greater good if the scenario calls for me to act for the greater good.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:"you don't know"==>THATS THE WHOLE POINT. which you ignore by assuming facts outside the hypo. the only facts you have is five vs one.
Alright then. If the fact that the five could be murderers is not part of the hypothetical, I would throw the switch. Because now they can't be murderers. You just affirmed that. If I know the five are good, I can save them by sacrificing one, even if he is also good.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 14, 2018 6:17 am

Poodle wrote:No, we're not bobbo. We let god decide and then we have no guilt. It has always been thus, especially when it comes to trolley problems.
I won't harp on it, and I do wonder how real it is...……….but I guess training to be a pilot in command generalizes to every other kind of decision there is? Ha, ha...…...easy to build ourselves up in our own minds......we love ourselves so.....

Word: you still don't get the math. If I were you...……………………………...I'd read up on the trolley problem and redo it every five years or so? Maybe write your analysis down? POTENTIALLY: you may amuse yourself at how your opinion changes over the years?????
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
psychiatry is a scam
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1508
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:23 am
Custom Title: do not go - into that -

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by psychiatry is a scam » Thu Aug 16, 2018 12:30 am

kinda off topic , maybe a diff thread ?
heard on the radio , people should think about retiring from driving when they retire !!!

im thinking just the opposite , get a car with all that driver assist crap , and :P

User avatar
Wordbird
Poster
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Thu Aug 16, 2018 5:01 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Word: you still don't get the math.
Oh I get math.

Let's start with the idea that one out of every five people is bad. They're either a murderer, or an adulterer/homewrecker, or something just really bad. This figure I just made up, but I did it to show you that I know my %$#@ing maths. It's an educated guess though, because some estimates put psychopaths at as high as one in ten, and it's a very small assumption that psychopaths are a full half of terrible wrongdoers.

The probability that the one person is bad, is one in five.

The probability that at least one of the five people is bad, is:

1 - (4/5 x 4/5 x 4/5 x 4/5 x 4/5)

1 - 0.32768

.67232

Roughly 67%

See what I did there? 4/5^5 is the probability that all five people are not bad. It's around 33%. The negation of that has a probability of 67%.

I'm not even dealing with the idea that I will probably crush at least one wrongdoer if I leave the train as it is. I'm not even dealing with how much wrong that person would do if they lived.

I am ONLY dealing with the unacceptable risk that I'm swerving the train away from bad people and crushing a good person.

I'm not saying the switching of tracks isn't probably right.

I agree that it's probably right.

I am saying that the risk of committing a horrible atrocity is unacceptably high. Even 20% is unacceptably high. Even 10% is quite high. Science wants a P-Value of .05 - a statistical 5% or less chance that you are wrong before you say your hypothesis is true.

I want an incredibly low chance of committing a horrible atrocity before I act. To me, this means I need some knowledge of the people involved.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 16, 2018 5:11 am

Again: "bad" is not in the hypo. So....all your math is wrong.

You also fail to do the same math for both sides of the equation...….then you totally fubar any common sense acceptance of what Probably and Unacceptably mean.

There is a psychological condition labeled: "discomfort with ambiguity." It affects rationality. I've never seen a figure for psychopath above about 1%====unless those train tracks are within a Maximum Prison Facility.

Again: you expressly DO say what you say you don't say...…………………"affects rationality."
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10551
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Poodle » Thu Aug 16, 2018 7:25 am

The maths is simple ...
What are the chances of me making any decision in the described circumstances? ... ... Zero.
What amount of extra information might change my mind? ... ... Zero.
The only thing you can't do with those figures is divide, just because you can't. So no matter how you tot things up, the answer is Zero.
I do mathematical analyses on other situations for a reasonable, but small, fee.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:17 am

Poodle.....I'm just a little bit unsure: you would let the five people die and no amount of additional information might change your mind?

……….I think in the series of follow up analysis, one of the five is a dear loved one of yours.

………………………………….Still no change?

I doubt it.

And doubting so, what have we learned?...…………...I'd put a spoiler down, but I tire of that game. People don't play well with it either.

Yep. Hypos. The very stuff of life.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Wordbird
Poster
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Fri Aug 17, 2018 2:59 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Again: "bad" is not in the hypo. So....all your math is wrong.
As I've said, if the fact that each of these people could be bad is me adding a fact not in the hypothetical, then "they might be bad" is not part of the hypothetical and they can't be bad. The negation of "it's possible" is IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. If they're all good I pull the switch, sacrificing one good person for five good people.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:You also fail to do the same math for both sides of the equation...….then you totally fubar any common sense acceptance of what Probably and Unacceptably mean.
Which probability would you like?
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:There is a psychological condition labeled: "discomfort with ambiguity." It affects rationality. I've never seen a figure for psychopath above about 1%====unless those train tracks are within a Maximum Prison Facility.

Again: you expressly DO say what you say you don't say...…………………"affects rationality."
Google "what percent of population sociopaths" and the top answer is four percent.

All I'm saying is that a high chance - even 10% or 20% - of committing a horrible atrocity is unacceptable. Is that wrong?

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34485
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: My nightmare
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:16 am

Wordbird wrote:If they're all good I pull the switch, sacrificing one good person for five good people.
You would purposefully kill someone in order to save five other people from something that you can't prevent without murdering someone?

Does the same apply to organ donations, as I've mentioned previously? Do you think it is moral to go out and murder, for example, a homeless person in order to harvest his organs so that five other people can get the organ transplants needed to save their lives?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 17, 2018 6:49 am

Wordbird wrote: All I'm saying is that a high chance - even 10% or 20% - of committing a horrible atrocity is unacceptable. Is that wrong?
Yes...…..by odds of 90% or 80%. Just look at your own math================>both sides.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 17, 2018 6:51 am

Gord wrote: Does the same apply to organ donations, as I've mentioned previously?
Different hypothetical raising very different issues. as was explained to you previously. Mere repetition does not strengthen an irrelevant argument.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10551
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Poodle » Fri Aug 17, 2018 8:05 am

Deary me! ALL additions to the information given in the statement of the Trolley Problem are hypothetical and raise very different issues and are therefore irrelevant. The only relevant information you can have is within the statement of the problem. The hidden assumption is, for no great reason, that you will do anything at all.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34485
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: My nightmare
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Fri Aug 17, 2018 8:37 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Gord wrote: Does the same apply to organ donations, as I've mentioned previously?
Different hypothetical raising very different issues. as was explained to you previously. Mere repetition does not strengthen an irrelevant argument.
It's exactly the same issue, which has been explained to you previously. Denying it does not make the problem go away: You are deliberately sacrificing one person to save five others from extenuating circumstances.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:58 am

No Gord. You again change the hypo. Why is paying attention so hard?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:06 am

Poodle wrote:Deary me! ALL additions to the information given in the statement of the Trolley Problem are hypothetical and raise very different issues and are therefore irrelevant. The only relevant information you can have is within the statement of the problem. The hidden assumption is, for no great reason, that you will do anything at all.
There is no hidden assumption. Only a question: What will the subjects do? that includes doing nothing.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10058
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Fri Aug 17, 2018 3:31 pm

I'd be surprised if there were a valid legal precedent for killing someone under the auspices of saving 5 others. I don't think anyone could escape a murder conviction.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 17, 2018 6:31 pm

Life boat survivors are not charged. Could be prosecutorial judgment not wanting to test the boundaries of necessity in emotionally publicly appealing cases.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34485
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: My nightmare
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Sat Aug 18, 2018 8:46 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:No Gord. You again change the hypo. Why is paying attention so hard?
I haven't changed it, I've understood it.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Aug 18, 2018 8:52 am

Gord wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:No Gord. You again change the hypo. Why is paying attention so hard?
I haven't changed it, I've understood it.
Don't be stupid or dishonest. There are NO extenuating circumstances. That is the BS you add to the hypo.

Heh, heh.....silly hoomans. Can't deal with what is entirely within their own heads.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34485
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: My nightmare
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:24 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Gord wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:No Gord. You again change the hypo. Why is paying attention so hard?
I haven't changed it, I've understood it.
Don't be stupid or dishonest. There are NO extenuating circumstances. That is the BS you add to the hypo.

Heh, heh.....silly hoomans. Can't deal with what is entirely within their own heads.
The extenuating circumstances I talked about were that five people were going to die because they're in the way of a trolley. That's intrinsic to the question, not added information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extenuating_circumstances
In law, extenuating circumstances in criminal cases are unusual or extreme facts leading up to or attending the perpetration of the offense which, although an offense has been perpetrated without legal justification or excuse, mitigate or reduce its gravity from the point of view of punishment or moral opprobrium.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

User avatar
Wordbird
Poster
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:26 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Wordbird wrote: All I'm saying is that a high chance - even 10% or 20% - of committing a horrible atrocity is unacceptable. Is that wrong?
Yes...…..by odds of 90% or 80%. Just look at your own math================>both sides.
I have a roughly 50% chance, if I switch the tracks, of destroying the pile that is more good than the other pile, no matter how many people are in each pile. (The chance normalises to exactly 50% at infinite people in at least one pile.)
Gord wrote:You would purposefully kill someone in order to save five other people from something that you can't prevent without murdering someone?

Does the same apply to organ donations, as I've mentioned previously? Do you think it is moral to go out and murder, for example, a homeless person in order to harvest his organs so that five other people can get the organ transplants needed to save their lives?
I think all such "deliberately sacrifice one to save more" hypotheticals suffer from the same basic issue: The one person was not about to die. The more people were about to die.

There is some reason for that.

But, armed with knowledge about what that reason is, and assuming I'm making an informed choice (and in a world not suffering from overpopulation, because in this world, more people alive does not equal better), I guess I would sacrifice one to save five.

I just wouldn't do it for a bunch of strangers because I don't know them.

When we can know, I think it's an easy answer and I agree with Bobbo. If it were truly immoral to harm or sacrifice one to save more, we couldn't really have a criminal justice system. Even incarcerating someone is a serious harm to them.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34485
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: My nightmare
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Sun Aug 19, 2018 2:08 am

Wordbird wrote:When we can know, I think it's an easy answer and I agree with Bobbo.
I don't understand. Can you expand on that a little?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

User avatar
Wordbird
Poster
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Sun Aug 19, 2018 3:44 am

Gord wrote:
Wordbird wrote:When we can know, I think it's an easy answer and I agree with Bobbo.
I don't understand. Can you expand on that a little?
Well, I don't know anyone who wouldn't run over five Hitlers to save one Ghandi.

Yes, that's extreme, but it establishes a clear principle: Good people are worth more than bad ones.

If I work at the railroad tracks, and I know all those people, and we have, in the group of five, a spouse-abuser, a drunk, a libertarian, a paedophile, and a bald man, maybe I let it happen, especially if the one person on the other tracks is an upstanding citizen with two happy children who love him and a gorgeous head of perfect, flowing locks.

*hair toss*

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10551
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Poodle » Sun Aug 19, 2018 6:21 am

But we cannot know. There is no knowledge of the potential victim/s given in the statement of the problem (this is the bit you're not getting, bobbo). To gain any knowledge, you'd have to ask them - you'd have to have time to actually interview the potential victims. And if you have that time, any sane person would use it to gesticulate wildly whilst running towards the potential crash site shouting "Get off the effin' track - there's a train coming". That way lies simplicity.
But you don't have the time. You only have time to throw a switch (or not) after making a decision (or not) based solely upon the numbers of potential victims.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34485
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: My nightmare
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Sun Aug 19, 2018 6:51 am

Oh, so you're saying you would evaluate which of the people are worthy of death! Now I get it.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10551
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Poodle » Sun Aug 19, 2018 7:44 am

I just responded to you, Gord, but then realised you were talking to Wordbird. So, really, I should have just not posted my response which, in fact, I didn't. I hope that's clear.

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Matthew Ellard » Sun Aug 19, 2018 8:19 am

Wordbird wrote:Well, I don't know anyone who wouldn't run over five Hitlers to save one Ghandi.
Running over one skinny Gandhi does less damage to the suspension than running over five fat Hitlers......It depends on how much you like you car. :D

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:24 am

Poodle wrote:But we cannot know. There is no knowledge of the potential victim/s given in the statement of the problem (this is the bit you're not getting, bobbo).
That is the VERY POINT of the experiment (not really.....its just this particular set up......but it feels like the right thing to say at this point in my inebriation...…..its almost bedtime)…….so...…….WHAT am I missing? Lack of knowledge is the whole point making the hypo just a numbers game.

I know: Math. Way to cloud everyone's mind. Silly. WHAT AM I NOT GETTING POODLE?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:28 am

Wordbird wrote: Well, I don't know anyone who wouldn't run over five Hitlers to save one Ghandi.
Yes....adding fact to the hypo creates an entirely new thead having nothing to do with the OP.

Let's imagine that the five are all outfitted in prison garb as a work crew? And the "one" is a nun picking flowers for the lunch time congregational? aka: Five Hitlers is impossible, so lets get real? so....who knows what crimes the Five have committed and what their futures may bring vs........one {!#%@} up bride of Christ.

I'd still let the numbers control.........but I'm anti-thiest to the core......and don't really respect those who aren't.

Now...........five Hitlers? Sure..........run them over. Fantasy is BS.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:35 am

Wordbird wrote: I have a roughly 50% chance, if I switch the tracks, of destroying the pile that is more good than the other pile, no matter how many people are in each pile. (The chance normalises to exactly 50% at infinite people in at least one pile.
You do the MATH showing 90 or 80% and then claim its 50%? How does THAT happen?? I won't get into what infinity on one side compared to one even means.

.......................................................................................Absolute refusal to face reality.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:36 am

The ability to "add more facts" is exactly what the AI/Internet Connected driverless cars is all about. It can do nothing but increase disagreement.

If you don't "know" the difference between five and one...…...adding more facts isn't going to help.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4709
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by ElectricMonk » Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:10 pm

As mentioned before, this hypothetical can become quite real when considering self-driving vehicles.
As you can test yourself at the

http://moralmachine.mit.edu/

, even with perfect knowledge about all potential victims we won't agree in each case who gets to die and who gets saved.
And I would argue that it is just a human bias to think that harm caused by inaction has less of a moral burden than harm caused by intervention.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17763
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 19, 2018 10:38 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:As mentioned before, this hypothetical can become quite real when considering self-driving vehicles.
LMFTFY: "As mentioned before, this hypothetical IS real NOW THAT self-driving vehicles ARE ON THE ROAD. They are already programmed...………..hmmm, that made me stop and wonder to what end/algorithm. I assume to act within X degrees of going straight?
ElectricMonk wrote: And I would argue that it is just a human bias to think that harm caused by inaction has less of a moral burden than harm caused by intervention.
Thats been said in substance before.....but excellent phrasing.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10551
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Poodle » Mon Aug 20, 2018 7:04 am

ElectricMonk wrote:As mentioned before, this hypothetical can become quite real when considering self-driving vehicles.
As you can test yourself at the

http://moralmachine.mit.edu/

, even with perfect knowledge about all potential victims we won't agree in each case who gets to die and who gets saved.
And I would argue that it is just a human bias to think that harm caused by inaction has less of a moral burden than harm caused by intervention.
And here we go around the circle again. In the Trolley problem, there is no way whatsoever to determine harm by action or inaction. Any such information is excluded. The above attempt to impose an associated moral burden is a complete red herring.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4709
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by ElectricMonk » Mon Aug 20, 2018 7:09 am

Poodle wrote: And here we go around the circle again. In the Trolley problem, there is no way whatsoever to determine harm by action or inaction. Any such information is excluded. The above attempt to impose an associated moral burden is a complete red herring.
only if you put zero value on human life itself.