The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

What you think about how you think.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

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

That's what I just said. You do that fairly often...……………..
Real Name: bobbo the 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
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8867
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:03 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:And yet . . . history is replete with examples of people sacrificing their own lives to save others.
But that's not the same hypothesis.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 11593
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 6:12 pm

landrew wrote:
OlegTheBatty wrote:And yet . . . history is replete with examples of people sacrificing their own lives to save others.
But that's not the same hypothesis.
The trolley problem is a false dichotomy because the option of sacrificing yourself is never included. It is not a moral dilemma, it is a fallacious construct designed to promote moralistic propaganda.
. . . 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

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8867
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:30 pm

These intractable dilemmas were invented to make things easy for teachers. Just pose the dilemma, and everyone is busy for 20 minutes.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Aug 08, 2018 7:04 pm

Good discussion so far. No one except EM and Moi stay within the hypothetical.

There is no dichotomy, false or otherwise. Self sacrifice is not part of the hypo because THAT explores a different issue. It is not a dilemma, intractable or not.

Now: The Spoiler AGAIN!!!!! (FOR f SAKE'S) states what the Hypo demonstrates. think for yourself what it is and take a peek. if you disagree, say why....I could be wrong, it just my response to what is shown. I suppose...….I could go back and whatch the video again, but I have faith my memory is close enough:

The HYPO IS:
Spoiler:
a demonstration that people tend to freeze when faced with decisions of great consequence.
Simple.
Real Name: bobbo the 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
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8867
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Wed Aug 08, 2018 7:19 pm

"The Trolley Hypothetical was neither about trolleys, nor was it hypothetical, discuss!"
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Aug 08, 2018 7:22 pm

Excellent. Good catch.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 33794
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:35 pm

ElectricMonk wrote: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.
Disagree. Both break down to the exact same thing: Sacrifice one to save five. The rational decision is to NOT intentionally kill someone to provide relief to five others.
"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: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:58 pm

Once you are in a position to choose who lives and dies you are left with THE INTENTION TO KILL: EITHER ONE, OR FIVE.

Calling it "relief" is quite a tell. Man up! You are going to kill today. You choose how many.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 33794
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:05 pm

That's assuming you fall into the trap of believing that doing nothing is doing something. If that's truly the case, then you are essentially responsible for everything that has ever happened anywhere you've been.

Yesterday at a restaurant, I witnessed a women putting hot sauce on her bread. I did nothing. Therefore, according to the "doing nothing is doing something," I am responsible for her actions, correct?
"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: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:24 pm

Well......did you know FIVE other people were going to die if you did nothing?
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 176
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:10 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:No. Its Math. Buy a math book. Read it. In number theory, you will discover that 5 is larger than 1.
But that doesn't mean that five is better than one! One cockroach, for example, is better than five cockroaches.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
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.
What additional factor? The one man is standing in the path of a train. The five are not. That is a huge deal.

It is at least possible (and probably likely) for the one man to have taken every precaution.

It is impossible for the five to have taken every precaution, because they are standing in the path of a train.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
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.
Woo factor? All I'm saying is that I do not know. There is some reason the one person was about to die and the five were not. Before I switch those tracks, I would have to know that reason.

Action and inaction are not the same. Action represents an increase in entropy. Yes, this is an extreme situation, but my only point is that I had better know damn well what's going on before I murder someone. That's my rule, and I think it's a good one.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:45 am

You are using a different hypo. Go look at the video in the OP.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 33794
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Gord » Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:45 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Well......did you know FIVE other people were going to die if you did nothing?
Lots of people die. I don't get to flat-out kill other people just to save them.

Did you know thousands of people die in traffic accidents every year? And yet I don't go out and murder car manufacturers, salesmen, or mechanics, because that would be wrong.
"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
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8867
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:42 pm

Gord wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Well......did you know FIVE other people were going to die if you did nothing?
Lots of people die. I don't get to flat-out kill other people just to save them.

Did you know thousands of people die in traffic accidents every year? And yet I don't go out and murder car manufacturers, salesmen, or mechanics, because that would be wrong.
I've never heard of a court case where the jury said it was "OK" to kill someone because the accused said it was to save five other people.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:09 pm

Deal with the hypo.
Real Name: bobbo the 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
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8867
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:37 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Deal with the hypo.
What use is a hypo if it won't square with reality?
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 09, 2018 5:07 pm

What would you DO landrew?
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 176
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Sat Aug 11, 2018 7:07 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:You are using a different hypo. Go look at the video in the OP.
I have. I just watched the whole thirty minutes again because you insist I'm not dealing with the real problem. The only thing I've noticed on the second go-around is that the one person is stipulated to be on his phone - he won't hear the train.

The five people are standing in the path of a train. They are about to die because they went where a train was coming.

The one person is not standing in the path of a train. He is not about to die because he did not go where a train was coming.

If you want me to switch the tracks, just stipulate that the six lives in question are equal value. Make that a known factor.

There's still some case to act for the true greater good, which is less overpopulation, but I won't quibble on that. We live in a very unusual world with an unusual degree of population explosion, and in a sustainable world, with the lives stipulated to be equal value, I would switch the tracks.

But remember that my life has value too, and our society considers this murder. This means that my life is over, too, if I do it. I accept that I have an obligation to choose five over two, nonetheless, but only if I know the values of their lives are equal. If I don't know, I can't act.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Aug 11, 2018 9:24 pm

Thanks Word: I respect you went back and watched again. I will too if my memory needs to be refreshed. Lets see:

1.
I have. I just watched the whole thirty minutes again because you insist I'm not dealing with the real problem. The only thing I've noticed on the second go-around is that the one person is stipulated to be on his phone - he won't hear the train.
/// What put you out of the hypothetical for me, and what I was referring to was
"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."
If you disagree that your quoted material is relevant: argue your case.

2.
The five people are standing in the path of a train. They are about to die because they went where a train was coming.

The one person is not standing in the path of a train. He is not about to die because he did not go where a train was coming.
The knowledge status of the people is NOT GIVEN. You are again adding facts to the hypo.

3.
If you want me to switch the tracks, just stipulate that the six lives in question are equal value. Make that a known factor.
How would THAT have been done? The contra is what makes the experiment REAL! In reality, we don't know the worth/value of other people.....its a pure construct of no value.

4.
There's still some case to act for the true greater good, which is less overpopulation, but I won't quibble on that. We live in a very unusual world with an unusual degree of population explosion, and in a sustainable world, with the lives stipulated to be equal value, I would switch the tracks.
4 less lives do not affect sustainability at all. complete non-sequitur.

5.
But remember that my life has value too, and our society considers this murder.
Protection of others, like self defense, is a long held/understood defense to murder. I post this only because a few others have mentioned it. another excuse for inaction.

6.
This means that my life is over, too, if I do it. I accept that I have an obligation to choose five over two, nonetheless, but only if I know the values of their lives are equal. If I don't know, I can't act.
So, you bring up a point that you determine is irrelevant to your action? Odd????? Or do you feel yourself flailing? ……...Oh....then I guess on the fairest read, you flip flop back again? All you have proven/indicated/been consistent with is: people fail to take the right action when facing new experiences they aren't prepared for...…...then make all kinds of excuses about it. Welcome to the hooman race.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 176
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Sun Aug 12, 2018 12:03 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:If you disagree that your quoted material is relevant: argue your case.
What I'm trying to demonstrate is that any greater good sacrifice scenario will require a small number of people who are not about to die, and a larger number of people who are about to die.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:The knowledge status of the people is NOT GIVEN. You are again adding facts to the hypo.
I am not adding anything. The five people are standing where a train is coming. The one is not.

It is possible for the one person to have taken every precaution. It is impossible for the five to have done so, because they are actually standing in the path of a train.

You can't eliminate this from a greater good sacrifice of any sort. The smaller number of people are not about to die. The larger number of people are.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:How would THAT have been done? The contra is what makes the experiment REAL! In reality, we don't know the worth/value of other people.....its a pure construct of no value.
If the valuation of people is a construct, then you can't know that the value of one is less than the value of five. That would be a knockdown if I agreed with you.

But I'm not arguing that peoples' relative values is a construct. I think they do have values and I do not know them. Almost certainly a Nazi war criminal would have negative value and Mother Theresa would have a positive value. In a real situation I am arguing that because I can't know the value of the people, I can't act. It is because of the lack of knowledge that it's not my place to throw that switch.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:4 less lives do not affect sustainability at all.
When universalised it does. If everyone acts for less population until sustainability is achieved, it will be achieved. Pick the thing that, if everyone does it, leads to the best outcome. Again, though, I'm not quibbling on this because we live in a strange world.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Protection of others, like self defense, is a long held/understood defense to murder. I post this only because a few others have mentioned it. another excuse for inaction.
It's not an excuse. What will actually happen to me is relevant too, regardless of whether I'm hit by a train or by a judge. Yes, I count. And protecting someone generally has to be against an actual aggressor, not an innocent. I am not saying the law is logical, I am just pointing out that because of the law, something will also happen to me and that's not irrelevant, because the whole scenario is about the sum total of harm, and minimising it.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 12, 2018 2:02 am

1. What I'm trying to demonstrate is that any greater good sacrifice scenario will require a small number of people who are not about to die, and a larger number of people who are about to die. //// Yes, and that has nothing to do with your added facts of carving up their organs for distribution.

2. I am not adding anything. The five people are standing where a train is coming. The one is not. /// What video did you watch? at 19:50 five people are standing on the left track and one person is standing on the right track. Plain as day. One death vs five is the whole point of the video...………...its on tape...…….everyone can see it. Why can't you?

3. bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
4 less lives do not affect sustainability at all.


When universalised it does /// Sure.....but its not universalized.

4. Your point about the law makes no sense.

You sure you aren't on drugs?
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 176
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:21 pm

The fact that the five people are about to die and the one is not does not constitute an added fact.

Did the one person take every precaution? Possible. He is not standing in the path of a train.

Did the five people take every precaution? Impossible. They are standing in the path of a train.

I'm sorry I went to the organ thing. I was just trying to demonstrate that any greater good sacrifice scenario involves a smaller number of people who are not about to die and a larger number of people who are about to die. And in any scenario, there's some reason for that.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 12, 2018 7:07 pm

1. Correct. No one has said it does, until YOU just then.

2. Third time: this is not known to group of five or the one.

Still wrong on every identified issue.

do you have a "final answer" on what you would do? Allow the five to die for whatever reason, or kill the one? I'll say again: its immoral to allow the death of five when sacrificing one would save them. I would throw the switch with moral certainty. My surprise (as stated earlier) is how many people would not, and the shockingly nonsensical excuses they throw up as to why.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Aug 12, 2018 9:00 pm

Does remind me of an existential puzzler: Nazi guard says you get Sophies Choice: choose which of two inmates will be shot, or both of them will be. What would you do???

Jean Paul Sarte writing that "We were never more Free than during the German occupation" said that an existentialist is only responsible for his own choices, so he would not kill. Who the Nazi kills thereafter is on the Nazi. I know...….morally abhorrent. Parse it out as you will. I just smile every time an existentialist gets run over by a train that is blowing its warning whistle.

It all pulls together...…………………….
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 176
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:34 pm

Obviously we are not going to agree on the scenario because you think I am adding facts. (Maybe I am overthinking it?)
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I'll say again: its immoral to allow the death of five when sacrificing one would save them. I would throw the switch with moral certainty. My surprise (as stated earlier) is how many people would not, and the shockingly nonsensical excuses they throw up as to why.
I would allow the five to die. I do not know the relative values of their lives, and I need to know if I'm going to act. I don't think it's a bad thing to require certainty before action, but not before inaction. I certainly can't kill someone if I don't know anything at all.

I know it's not the same scenario, but do you think you could get a mother to sacrifice her baby to save five random people? Why or why not?
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Does remind me of an existential puzzler: Nazi guard says you get Sophies Choice: choose which of two inmates will be shot, or both of them will be. What would you do???

Jean Paul Sarte writing that "We were never more Free than during the German occupation" said that an existentialist is only responsible for his own choices, so he would not kill. Who the Nazi kills thereafter is on the Nazi. I know...….morally abhorrent. Parse it out as you will. I just smile every time an existentialist gets run over by a train that is blowing its warning whistle.

It all pulls together...…………………….
There's a huge assumption in the existentialist's case: That the Nazi is being honest. He has the gun. It's not as if he's forbidden from turning around and killing the one I picked to live, or killing both of them anyway.

But to answer your question, I don't think I buy the existentialist's case either, even if the Nazi is being honest.

I think it's safe to say I know more about these two people than in the train scenario, because I am in the concentration camp with them.

If I know nothing about either of them, I'm still standing firm: I can't act if I don't know. The best I can do is ask for a volunteer, but this is only to glean as much knowledge as I can. I'll probably kill whichever one doesn't volunteer.

But since I've been packed in a concentration camp with these fellows for a while, I'll kill whichever one I know is a scumbag. Even if neither of them is a scumbag, I can still act and choose at random, knowing I saved someone good.

It's ridiculous to consider this murder because I'm not holding the gun.

Also, if there are two being threatened out of 10, and I know we have enough food for 8 people, but not nine, I let him kill them both.

User avatar
psychiatry is a scam
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1421
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:23 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by psychiatry is a scam » Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:58 am

been wanting to put this somewhere , this is a good spot . couple weeks ago , a guy tries to commit suicide by crossing a busy freeway .
I was told by one guy that he was just walking from the center barrier to the shoulder and people had to swerve to avoid him .
later he ran from the shoulder out in front of a truck , that hit him .
and after a few days I started thinking … what would computers be programmed to do ?
the people may have slowed down , but no one stopped in the middle of the freeway to try to stop traffic .
wonder what a police car would do ? would the police have to take the risk and stop in traffic ?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:30 am

Wordbird wrote: I know it's not the same scenario, but do you think you could get a mother to sacrifice her baby to save five random people? Why or why not?
That was covered above.
Wordbird wrote: There's a huge assumption in the existentialist's case: That the Nazi is being honest.
Gee, you're going for the "Good Nazi" alternative? Ha, ha...………...totally nuts.

Wordbird wrote: But to answer your question, I don't think I buy the existentialist's case either, even if the Nazi is being honest.
The courageous rejection of all alternatives huh? YES: more people than I would have thought do not like the low information hypotheticals. Leads them to INACTION. The very point/finding of the video.


Wordbird wrote: It's ridiculous to consider this murder because I'm not holding the gun.
Then why bring it up? Say Word: let's play poker for money some day? You leak tells like a bucket of water in the middle of the Sahara.

Hypotheticals: a good tool for discovering what you actually think/feel/understand.

Not being able to do hypotheticals: one confused unreliable person.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:32 am

Psyche: the value of AI traffic is that "All" the traffic actions could be coordinated so that the interloper in question could get the help he needed. I assume all the traffic would slow down and stop. Something AI can do, and hoomans can't. That's just a single example of how AI will save lives.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 176
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:10 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Gee, you're going for the "Good Nazi" alternative? Ha, ha...………...totally nuts.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying he is a good Nazi; I'm saying you have to trust him for the scenario to work. You have to trust that when he says he'll spare whichever one you don't choose, he's telling the truth.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:YES: more people than I would have thought do not like the low information hypotheticals. Leads them to INACTION. The very point/finding of the video.
Can you explain why you think defaulting to inaction is so wrong? Any action I take represents an increase in entropy. This means, all else being equal, actions tend to ruin {!#%@}. Therefore an action must be well-understood, and the probable consequences well-understood, before that action can be taken. Am I wrong?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:23 am

In a hypo: you ACCEPT the givens. When you don't, you can't deal with the facts that ARE before you.

Its MATH. As has been stated 5 times now. Five dead vs one.

Simple.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 1421
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:23 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by psychiatry is a scam » Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:47 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Psyche: the value of AI traffic is that "All" the traffic actions could be coordinated so that the interloper in question could get the help he needed. I assume all the traffic would slow down and stop. Something AI can do, and hoomans can't. That's just a single example of how AI will save lives.
kind of like that uber car did ?
right now they are programmed to stop only if the speed is below 30 ???

wouldn't there be a mix of both kinds of cars for years ?
stoodpid humon cars and ai cars


thinking all this could of been avoided if car companies had not conspired to get rid of rail transportation.

china had a chance to avoid addiction to cars .
amazing what car addicts will do to get what they want.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 5:20 am

kind of like that uber car did ? /// No. Your sarcasm: fails.
right now they are programmed to stop only if the speed is below 30 ??? /// Doesn't matter. Its a choice. Program the AI as DEMOCRACY DECIDES.

wouldn't there be a mix of both kinds of cars for years ? /// Yes....so what?
stoodpid humon cars and ai cars /// Yes.


thinking all this could of been avoided if car companies had not conspired to get rid of rail transportation. /// It was Standard Oil not car co's and IT is still at it today......funding AGW Denial, confusing all too many.

china had a chance to avoid addiction to cars . /// Excellent point.
amazing what car addicts will do to get what they want. /// Personal mobility does increase FREEEEEEEEEDOM. Totally understandable.
Real Name: bobbo the 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: 176
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:03 pm

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by Wordbird » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:04 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:In a hypo: you ACCEPT the givens. When you don't, you can't deal with the facts that ARE before you.

Its MATH. As has been stated 5 times now. Five dead vs one.

Simple.
It is not a given that the five lives are worth more than one. I am not adding facts when I say that the five could be murderers and the one could be a saint. We do not know.

You're stating they are - five lives are worth more than one life. You're stating the positive. The one person is not a saint and the five are not murderers. This is your contention. The burden of proof is yours.

All I'm saying is I don't know.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:22 pm

Word, we are getting repetitive. I keep responding not to change your mind but to help you see the issues? THEN make up your own mind based on your values. That done....I assume 99.9 people will agree to throw the switch.....BECAUSE five is more than one. It "IS" MATH.

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?

"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.

Go============================>
Real Name: bobbo the 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
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8867
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:24 pm

Wordbird wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:In a hypo: you ACCEPT the givens. When you don't, you can't deal with the facts that ARE before you.

Its MATH. As has been stated 5 times now. Five dead vs one.

Simple.
It is not a given that the five lives are worth more than one. I am not adding facts when I say that the five could be murderers and the one could be a saint. We do not know.

You're stating they are - five lives are worth more than one life. You're stating the positive. The one person is not a saint and the five are not murderers. This is your contention. The burden of proof is yours.

All I'm saying is I don't know.
And I'm saying we don't have the authority (moral or otherwise) to sacrifice someone's life, even ostensibly to save 5 others.
Imagine 6 people in a lifeboat who vote to sacrifice you to feed the other 5, and then everyone is rescued the next day.
It's a non sequitur.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:49 pm

That's exactly what happens most of the time...…….when YOU are in the lifeboat. People even all agree to it and pull straws.

Saved the next day?==>not in the hypo. Such a silly response.

Take on EM's excellent challenge: you won't select one over five...………...so what number would you use? the game stops with all lives in the universe. Animal, plant, pure energy. Still comfortable in your mountain of ignorance?
Real Name: bobbo the 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
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8867
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:03 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:That's exactly what happens most of the time...…….when YOU are in the lifeboat. People even all agree to it and pull straws.

Saved the next day?==>not in the hypo. Such a silly response.

Take on EM's excellent challenge: you won't select one over five...………...so what number would you use? the game stops with all lives in the universe. Animal, plant, pure energy. Still comfortable in your mountain of ignorance?
It is part of the scenario. In the trolley car scenario, nobody knows if the 5 people had time to duck out of the way, or were pushed aside without injury. It is very relevant to say that the decision to deliberately sacrifice someone's life in the belief that it may save 5 others is outside the scope of the law. There's simply no way to predict the outcome with certainty.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15563
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:06 pm

that's true landrew but you continue to avoid that whatever you think about the quality of the five also applies to the one and the odds are five to one.

Still working on your number?...……….or histerically blind?
Real Name: bobbo the 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
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8867
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: The Trolley Hypothetical Made REAL

Post by landrew » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:24 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:that's true landrew but you continue to avoid that whatever you think about the quality of the five also applies to the one and the odds are five to one.

Still working on your number?...……….or histerically blind?
I'll simplify it for you. The scenario affords you no legal or moral defense, if you choose to carry it out.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.