• BolexForSoup
    link
    fedilink
    10
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    The whole point of the trolley problem is to illustrate how difficult culpability/blame is and how a single choice can be incredibly multi-faceted to the point where you can’t possibly untangle it and find the “correct” answer unless you adhere to a strict, well-defined moral framework. Which usually means making a choice to ignore other factors and other valid moral frameworks. Hence the conundrum. It’s real use is to test drive how each framework handles the situation and to see your reaction to it.

    You’re missing the lesson here, or purposely obscuring it to win an internet argument in the hopes no one looks too closely because you cited a thoroughly-meme’d smart sounding philosophical question.

    • OfCourseNot
      link
      fedilink
      17 months ago

      The ‘correct’ answer to the trolley problem is subjective, that’s the whole point. I used it to illustrate where I stand, not what the absolutely moral choice is.

      I’ve been pointing how awful that trolley company is since I reached my teens, I’ve been out in the streets protesting the dangers of this very track, trying to stop the trolleys from running, I would burn down the Trolley Company’s headquarters if needed, but I am not killing that one guy no matter what.

      I wasn’t trying to ‘win’ an argument or even convince the other commenter of anything, just trying to tell my point of view as a non voter (for ethical reasons). I see voting as a very meaningful action, if the person I vote wins everything they do while in power is going to be a bit either thanks to me or my fault. And they do a lot more bad than good, I would feel that some of that blood is in my hands.

      • @HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        17 months ago

        The police officers in Uvalde had no legal responsibility to protect the children in the school. They were not required to charge in and stop–shoot–the person that murdered so many children. And yet, we quite rightly condemn their unwillingness to act, even though acting would placed them at risk of harm or death at the hands of the shooter. They had the ability to prevent mass murder, and they did not.

        The person that refuses to act, when it puts them at no risk, and costs no more than the minor inconvenience of standing in line for a few minutes, is certainly no better than the police officers in Uvalde.

        • OfCourseNot
          link
          fedilink
          07 months ago

          I’m opposed to killing ‘innocent’ people, if the guy in the trolley problem wanted to kill the people on the other track I would certainly pull the lever. But now that you bring children killers to the conversation, you are arguing not just for not getting into the school or stoping the killer but for voting him for more child-killing because the other child-killer is worst. I find all of that very twisted and I want no part in it.

          • @HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            Whether you want to be a part of it or not, if you are a US citizen, you are. Your only choice is to reduce hard, or not.