The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

What you think about how you think.
User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Mon Aug 06, 2018 2:47 pm

Let's just face it. No one is trained to sacrifice one person to save five. It's a personal decision, which I doubt most people would make, particularly within the few seconds of the scenario presented.

Imagine a mine cave-in scenario. 35 people could be saved by blowing up a part of the mine that would kill 1 person. Can you imagine such a decision actually being made?
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 06, 2018 2:48 pm

EM--I like your beginning. All other things being equal, and criminal status being neutral, how many "others" should a politician be worth?.....admitting that a fraction consideration wins over one without a fraction?
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: 19016
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 06, 2018 2:51 pm

Landrew: don't be disingenuous. "I" am happy to make that decision. THAT DECISION: to save lives. Read my signature line: The most good for the most people. Not a silly old hen who can't make the right decision STARING THEM IN THE FACE WITH ALARM BELLS GOING OFF!!!!!!

Besides, what makes this REAL...…...is the decision is before us RIGHT NOW....and not by faulty deplorable voters who would program in the race and politics card....but by democratically selected cultural values to be sorted and tallied by Skynet.

Bow Now to our Overlords...……………..
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: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:01 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Landrew: don't be disingenuous. "I" am happy to make that decision. THAT DECISION: to save lives. Read my signature line: The most good for the most people. Not a silly old hen who can't make the right decision STARING THEM IN THE FACE WITH ALARM BELLS GOING OFF!!!!!!

Besides, what makes this REAL...…...is the decision is before us RIGHT NOW....and not by faulty deplorable voters who would program in the race and politics card....but by democratically selected cultural values to be sorted and tallied by Skynet.

Bow Now to our Overlords...……………..
I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that you would willingly kill a person to save others, although you haven't put yourself in such a position. It's not entirely clear whether the legal system would agree that you committed a justifiable homicide. Perhaps they would take the view that it wasn't your decision to make, and you may be charged with homicide.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 06, 2018 3:04 pm

sorry L: I was subject to the Draft to do exactly that....and my training and attitude have stayed with me. I never thought of the Viet Cong except as innocent political victims.....no different than me.

Stay focused and moral. "The greater good for the greater number." No rational person can disagree...…..just as evidenced by this thread.
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: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:11 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:sorry L: I was subject to the Draft to do exactly that....and my training and attitude have stayed with me. I never thought of the Viet Cong except as innocent political victims.....no different than me.

Stay focused and moral. "The greater good for the greater number." No rational person can disagree...…..just as evidenced by this thread.
So, we all need to be drafted, so that we could be trained to decide who needs to die for the greater good?
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 06, 2018 3:15 pm

l: just read. ask again if you need to.
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: 19016
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 06, 2018 4:00 pm

I went back and read the beginning of this thread. Some good points and issues made/raised. I can see why "innocent lives" got stuck in my 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
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34854
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:34 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Again: failure to engage. Nothing in the hypo about organ distribution or anything else other than "lives in being."

Why are you making stuff up?
What are you talking about? If "hypo" means "hypothetical", then by definition it's "made up".
"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
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34854
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:37 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I'm at a loss to understand the opposition here. The hypo sets forth a VERY EASY numbers game, NO OTHER FACTORS....yet few here are able to do the math.
The factor is "kill someone to save five others".
Reality: YOU can choose to have one innocent life taken or five. You all freeze with an abundance of IRRELEVANT EXCUSES. That is the very NOT POINTLESS and FULL OF SOD truth about human behavior/INability to think. This follow on discussion only driving that point/realization home. I pity our species.

Is it my pilot training? If Radar shows you are seconds away from hitting a mountain peak....the only rational thing to do is to turn left or right and hope you miss the mountain (airplanes don't climb well at altitude with seconds to go). To FREEZE and do nothing is just...….plain.....stupid.

As stated somewhere above....I can see this reaction in an untrained/unexposed person. But not as with this discussion having the TIME to think all the option thru. Heh, heh....whole new hooman fraility to see the totally irrelevant additional facts added to the hypo in a failed attempt to justify the traumatic FREEZE when ACTION is called for.

You all need to think...………...more.
I see. So your pilot training is telling you to go out and murder people, harvest their organs, and donate them to people who need organ transplants.

I find that rather telling.
"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
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:42 pm

"Sorry, your honor, I had to shoot the guy because he was going to kill 5 people."
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34854
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:34 am

landrew wrote:"Sorry, your honor, I had to shoot the guy because he was going to kill 5 people."
:befuddled:

Did you mean to say, "Sorry, your honor, I had to shoot the guy because someone else was going to kill 5 people"?
"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: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Tue Aug 07, 2018 3:04 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:We win when 1 innocent person is killed instead of 5 innocent people.
That presumes they're innocent.

Why, anyway? Why is one life worth less than five? What if it's one upstanding teenager with his whole life ahead of him and five old gangsters who are all going to die of heart failure tomorrow?

It also depends on the world, doesn't it? If you're in a post-apocalyptic scenario, one life is more valuable than five if the one is a female of child-bearing age.

My argument is still that the one could have taken every precaution and the five did not, or they would not be standing in a train's path. I don't think it's okay to sacrifice one cautious person to save five potheads who will just die some other stupid way, and if this actually happened, that's what it's likely to be.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Read my signature line: The most good for the most people.
The greater good for the most people? That's less overpopulation.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 07, 2018 4:24 am

None of you understand/demonstrate/or choose to stay within the hypothetical.

1. Hypotheticals are made up to isolate certain facts and EXCLUDE all others. How do you DEAL WITH the issues on the table? When you introduce ideas/facts NOT IN THE HYPOTHETICAL....you are being totally irrelevant.

any other questions?

2. I have already admitted I also strayed from the Hypo when I called all the parties "innocent." That was a carry over from where the thread had gone months ago. So...returning to the hypo: "to me" its a flat out moral question: you have a situation that does arise in the real world that either one person is going to be killed or 5 are. No other choices, considerations, or facts are known. 1 vs 5. Seems to me whatever factors anyone thinks is relevant concerning the one is present TIMES FIVE in the alternative.

This does crack me up: that there is any discussion at all. Reverse it: Trolly headed towards one person on the track and you can throw the switch to kill Five on the other route. Who would do that? Why not?? Why is the reverse any issue at all??????

Now...I have posted what I knew would be unpopular issues regarding immigrants, native peoples, Muslim Religion, and eugenics to name a few. I do not troll and gave my honest opinion on those subjects EXPECTING negative feedback because the issues are complicated. I didn't see any negative feedback due on this issue. The only live issue is "Why do people freeze when it comes to taking the correct moral action?"

"Basically"...….what else is dealing with life?...…..and what is life but various different hypotheticals come real...just as is on us RIGHT NOW with AI Driven Cars. Some of the issues are raised above.

Stay within the hypothetical. Its good thinking. Want to make up/add facts? No problem at all...…..just recognize that is what you are doing.
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: 10792
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 07, 2018 7:27 am

OK. Hypothetically, I would calculate the amount of time the points would be in 'mid-track' position and throw the switch just as the truck reached the points, thus derailing it and saving all six lives.
Simples!

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 07, 2018 1:19 pm

Poodle: good outside the box (hypothetical) thinking making you a superhero. ………….Heh, heh...….I wonder. I'll assume that switches don't throw if they sense a train is on them? I'd be dismayed, but not surprised, if this is not the case?

the hypothetical is about PEOPLE FREEZING AND DOING NOTHING when under stress of new situations.

Again, to bring the hypo home: its IMMORAL not to throw the switch. You can dither and make excuses all you want. But that's the case.
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
Monster
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5560
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Monster » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:47 pm

I have not yet watched the video in the opening post. I'll watch it soon.
Gord wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I do assume, with any "exposure" to the issues, 100% of people would throw the switch?
Hell no! I wouldn't, if I were allowed the chance to think it through first.

If it's morally right to sacrifice one innocent person who would otherwise have survived in order to save five others who are going to die, then is it alright to kill one person in order to harvest his or her organs in order to transplant them into five patients who are going to die without organ transplants?

Besides, I've never seen it as an automatic death for the five people on the trolley's path. They could notice it coming and get out of its way. The more people in front of it, the more likely one or more of them will notice it coming and help the others avoid it. A single person (in my experience of being hit by moving objects) is more likely to be hit by the trolley, even if the other five see the trolley moving towards him because they're too far to manually help him (yelling at me to move has never saved me unless I already knew something was coming towards me).
Gord is correct. The correct answer to the trolley hypothetical is to NOT push the fat guy onto the tracks. The equivalent, much more real scenario of the trolley hypothetical, is sacrificing one person to harvest their organs to replace malfunctioning organs in other people. And we don't do that. China does it, but we don't.

The logical conclusion of deliberately killing innocent people to save other people is monstrous oppression. It's communism in practice. Putting the rights of the individual on par with the rights of the many is where civil liberties come from.
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5137
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by ElectricMonk » Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:43 pm

I would argue that there is no correct answer to the trolley problem, since the whole point of the Gedankenexperiment is to highlight the reluctance of most people top make utilitarian decision.
But the fact that most of us wouldn't want to make the decision is a pure accident of us being born in a time of affluence: for most of European history, a long, harsh winter would often lead to the old being left in the woods to freeze to spare enough food for the rest to reach spring, plus the seeds necessary for the fields. Beleaguered cities would often shift rations to those able to fight, leaving the sick and very young to die. Maritime law was founded on the basis that the captain of a ship has the authority to kill in cold blood any passenger or member of his crew in order to improve the chance of saving the vessel.
This might be monstrous, but being able to make such decisions has doubtlessly saved net lives.
Calling it communism is just silly: it's optimizing survival of the group, which is a ubiquitous goal.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:16 pm

Let's assume that the Trolley Problem is taught in schools, and it's resolved that it is indeed better to kill one person to save five. Eventually someone swerves to avoid hitting five pedestrians, and kills one. Don't you think the lawyer for the defense would try to use the excuse of the Trolley Hypothetical instead of admitting that the driver should have been driving more slowly and paying more attention?
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 07, 2018 5:06 pm

Monster and landrew: learn to color within the lines.
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: 10792
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 07, 2018 7:13 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: ... its IMMORAL not to throw the switch. You can dither and make excuses all you want. But that's the case.
A bit after the fact, though. It's actually immoral (IMO) to make people think they're in a real-life situation being forced into having to choose who to kill. It's distinctly possible that some of the 'subjects' may need psychiatric support somewhere down the line (pun not intended).

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34854
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:35 pm

Wordbird wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:We win when 1 innocent person is killed instead of 5 innocent people.
That presumes they're innocent.
assumes

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/presume-assume/
In the shared meaning of “to suppose,” presume is usually used when you suppose based on probability, while assume is used when you suppose without any evidence.
"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: 19016
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 07, 2018 8:09 pm

Poodle wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: ... its IMMORAL not to throw the switch. You can dither and make excuses all you want. But that's the case.
A bit after the fact, though. It's actually immoral (IMO) to make people think they're in a real-life situation being forced into having to choose who to kill. It's distinctly possible that some of the 'subjects' may need psychiatric support somewhere down the line (pun not intended).
Different fact pattern...……..and not even true. Covered early in the thread if not the op.
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: 10792
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 07, 2018 9:42 pm

Absolute twaddle, bobbo! It's as true as anything else you're going to come across in the universe. Those people were forced into action - or inaction - without their permission and in a highly stressful situation. Telling them that no one was hurt AFTER the event is BS - they've already gone through the trauma believing it to be real. All highly questionable activity merely to act out a moral dilemma.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 07, 2018 9:52 pm

They were psych students who volunteered and I assume were paid. I bet not a single one had anything but fun.

Why would you think otherwise...………...ha, ha...…...or is it "me" again???? I'd love to see my faults in make believe situations where no one got hurt. Course...……..I would have thrown the switch SAVING LIVES and thinking I was GREAT!!!!!!!!!

ymmv
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: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:34 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Hypotheticals are made up to isolate certain facts and EXCLUDE all others. How do you DEAL WITH the issues on the table? When you introduce ideas/facts NOT IN THE HYPOTHETICAL....you are being totally irrelevant.
Staying within the hypothetical, you don't know anything about these people. That killing one to save five does more good than harm is a huge assumption.

And I don't think that the one person who took precautions against the five who didn't is outside the hypothetical at all. The one person is not standing in the path of a train. He's earned the right not to be hit by one. The five are careless.

This is going to be the same for any hypothetical that requires this sort of a greater good sacrifice. I dispute it's for the greater good at all. Chopping up one healthy person to save five sick ones is, in all likelihood, sacrificing a genetically clean slate in favour of some horrible genetic problems. And if it wasn't genetic, and that guy drank his liver to death, still no.

In order for the sacrifice scenario to work, the one person is not about to die. The five are. There's some reason for that.

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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:47 am

I'm with Wordbird on this matter. I don't think there is much point in exploring any hypothetical, whereas, in the real world, there are always further layers of questions and facts than can be weighed up, to allow for a better decision.

"Would you rather lose an arm or a leg?"
(This is a silly question on its own)

If you think about the law, there is legislation that states exactly what the law is, but then you have judge-made law or common law, that states what other facts about the case, need to be considered.

Think how complex and various all the common law is for "Justifiable homicide".
:D

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34854
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Wed Aug 08, 2018 3:20 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:"Would you rather lose an arm or a leg?"
(This is a silly question on its own)
I'd rather if a leg lost an arm.
"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
ElectricMonk
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5137
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by ElectricMonk » Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:32 am

When considering the value of various humans lives, assumptions about the future have always outweighed what we know about their past: women and children are usually given priority over men and the the old, not because they are more virtuous, but because they have greater potential, in time and through producing more offspring. Without any other data, saving five by losing one will lead to greater potential to affect the future through these lives, since five can do more than one.
The question of how culpable the five are in their predicament is only relevant in as much as it might indicate how likely they are to find themselves in peril again.

But the fact remains that without any further data about the persons on the tracks, the rational decisions is to kill one to safe five (if those are the only choices available). Every other action requires assumptions about the potential victims and how your actions might be perceived by others.
This is fundamentally different from the healthy organ donor example, since there is time to gather plenty of data about all the people affected.

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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 7:07 am

Gord wrote:I'd rather if a leg lost an arm.
Matthew : "I don't like that leg standing there on its own. It looks very dangerous"
Skeptic : "Don't worry. It's completely armless" (harmless)

(This is why Australian humour is where it is today)
:D

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:56 am

The Common Sense Reality Denial continues:
Wordbird wrote: Staying within the hypothetical, you don't know anything about these people. That killing one to save five does more good than harm is a huge assumption.
No. Its Math. Buy a math book. Read it. In number theory, you will discover that 5 is larger than 1. Knowing nothing about these people is EXACTLY what makes the moral decision to throw the switch: IMPERATIVE. ………………...and IMMORAL not to.
Wordbird wrote: And I don't think that the one person who took precautions against the five who didn't is outside the hypothetical at all. The one person is not standing in the path of a train. He's earned the right not to be hit by one. The five are careless.
I don't remember, is that what happened? If so, that would be a faulty set up I think as it does introduce that additional factor. THIS IS THE BEAUTY OF HYPOTHETICALS: isolating the variables. Imagine now ((ha, ha, yes another example of the GRANDUER of being able to think in hypotheticals)) two hypotheticals run: One: with an innocent not standing on the railway and TWO: where the one person is on the tracks in the same manner as the five. Would the two different hypotheticals have a different result? If so, then that variable would be shown to influence peoples decision making. We would learn how hoomans think/emote/make decisions/what they value and don't value. Just as when the hypo is changed around by making the ONE persona a family member. it makes a difference.
Wordbird wrote: This is going to be the same for any hypothetical that requires this sort of a greater good sacrifice. I dispute it's for the greater good at all. Chopping up one healthy person to save five sick ones is, in all likelihood, sacrificing a genetically clean slate in favour of some horrible genetic problems. And if it wasn't genetic, and that guy drank his liver to death, still no.
That's not the hypo under consideration and the pros and cons of this hypo were listed above. No need to repeat them again. Did you even read the thread?
Wordbird wrote: In order for the sacrifice scenario to work, the one person is not about to die. The five are. There's some reason for that.
Heh, heh....now you introduce some unnamed unknowable WOO factor? Bad Thinking....if thinking at all...as opposed to unbridled emotionalism. Think the hypo and its variables through. You should learn something about yourself AND THEN be able to make real, rather than unthinking, CHOICES. Making CHOICES: is what LIFE is all about.

Try it.
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: 19016
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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:11 am

The Common Sense Reality Denial continues:
Matthew Ellard wrote:I'm with Wordbird on this matter.
Well, that's disappointing. If contributing at all, I expected your agreement, YOU being rational for the most part. Does eating Kangaroo rot the mind? ((Just saw a clip from "Arrival" where the linguistics person said Kangaroo was Aboriginal for "I don't understand what you are saying." I thought if true that was very amusing.))
Matthew Ellard wrote:I don't think there is much point in exploring any hypothetical,
I can support disagreeing WITH REASONS GIVEN with any hypothetical but to post that hypos don't have much point is just blithering STOOPID. The hypo with the fewest variables are the easiest to deal with. Add in more factors and the complexity level only rises. Learn to crawl before you demand to run.
Matthew Ellard wrote:... in the real world, there are always further layers of questions and facts than can be weighed up, to allow for a better decision.
In the real World, answers are formulated on every level of complexity there is with depending on the context different values taking control. We have the current hypothetical RIGHT NOW. How should our current crop of AI driven machines BE PROGRAMMED? RIGHT NOW: should they be programmed to just plow ahead and let circumstances just play out or should the simplest of calculations that we can do now be made? Save Five for One....or let chance rule? I don't really care (unless a loved one is one of the five==>and that happening is five times more likely in this hypo) or should we wait for who knows what more complicated factors to get added into the equation? The key moral issues still remain. Adding complexity doesn't avoid what so few here are capable of dealing with.
Matthew Ellard wrote: to allow for a better decision.
More inane chatter. You make the best decision you can with the information you have at the time you have the decision to make. Silly to dither as you do.
Matthew Ellard wrote: "Would you rather lose an arm or a leg?"
(This is a silly question on its own)

If you think about the law, there is legislation that states exactly what the law is, but then you have judge-made law or common law, that states what other facts about the case, need to be considered.

Think how complex and various all the common law is for "Justifiable homicide".
:D
What does this off topic dithering have to do with anything? Why not think of pie to the 3 millionth decimal place? That is very complicated/difficult as well. So what?
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: 19016
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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:13 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Gord wrote:I'd rather if a leg lost an arm.
Matthew : "I don't like that leg standing there on its own. It looks very dangerous"
Skeptic : "Don't worry. It's completely armless" (harmless)

(This is why Australian humour is where it is today)
:D
The word play was fine. Explaining the joke is Australian. More Kangaroo please.
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: 10792
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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:56 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:When considering the value of various humans lives, assumptions about the future have always outweighed what we know about their past: women and children are usually given priority over men and the the old, not because they are more virtuous, but because they have greater potential, in time and through producing more offspring. Without any other data, saving five by losing one will lead to greater potential to affect the future through these lives, since five can do more than one ....
And you're normally so sensible, EM! I particularly liked "Without any other data, saving five by losing one will lead to greater potential ...". So, without any other data, how do you determine the certainly of that "will". The fact is (THE FACT IS) that in the presented situation there is absolutely zero information apart from it's 5 against 1. Yet here are making value judgements - and that, of course, is the trap. You cannot know what the potential is on either side. What you mean is that you're making a bet based on apparently favourable odds. Bookmakers make fortunes out of that.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:15 pm

Poodle!?!?!?!? You are so obviously and simply wrong. There is no puzzle here. Whatever you think: its FIVE TO ONE.

There is no "certainty" beyond the FIVE TO ONE. YOU ARE ADDING THAT INTO THE HYPO. There is NO TRAP.

This is not really even "discomfort with ambiguity" which is often in play with minimum information hypos. Weird this issue of not being able to deal with FIVETOONE has come up.

Honestly: it mystifies me. ……………..and with easy assumptions added to it: it would be difficult to identify what additional factors would have to be present to change what is obvious. Make the One a Good Hearted Nun and the Five all Escaped Child Molesting Convicts on their way to the Children's Home to kill all the Good Hearted Nuns and rape them all and the kiddies too? Ok...…..and see how the hypo illustrates what values are held above others?

Amusing. Weird...….but amusing. Bookmakers don't make money on FIVETOONE unless their play is 10 to one. You even flunk the basic math. ……………….heavy on the weird.
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
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5137
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by ElectricMonk » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:01 pm

Spock > Kirk
If that wasn't the case, where would be the limit?
If we can't decide between 1:5, can we at 1:10?
1:100?

Could we honestly not say that it is moral to cause the death of one in order to safe a million?

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 11974
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by OlegTheBatty » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:08 pm

Throw yourself in front of the trolley. Moral problem solved.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

.......................Doesn't matter how often I'm proved wrong.................... ~ bobbo the pragmatist

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:27 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Spock > Kirk
If that wasn't the case, where would be the limit?
If we can't decide between 1:5, can we at 1:10?
1:100?

Could we honestly not say that it is moral to cause the death of one in order to safe a million?
Of course we could say that, but someone is sure to question your authority to do exactly that. If you ran up and pulled a railway switch, diverting a train which kills one person, you may have your hands full in court proving that you did right killing one person to save the other five. I'm guessing you would still end up doing time.

I think Harry S. Truman did it, with the dropping of atomic bombs, but he had ultimate authority. The argument at the time was that more people would die during an invasion of Japan, than would die from a nuclear blast. Not quite the same thing.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19016
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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:49 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:Throw yourself in front of the trolley. Moral problem solved.
Thats not the hypo. I have no problem with you NEW AND DIFFERENT HYPO: I would not do it for One Million People. What does this "worthless" hypo show? I care more for myself than I do one million people.....and I assume most others would draw their line fairly high as well. THIRD DIFFERENT HYPO: ADD a few family, friends, loved ones into that One Million.....and my operating number starts to get lower.

Hypos show what matters to people.

Being stupid appears to be high on the list of all too many.
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
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 11974
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by OlegTheBatty » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:51 pm

And yet . . . history is replete with examples of people sacrificing their own lives to save others.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

.......................Doesn't matter how often I'm proved wrong.................... ~ bobbo the pragmatist