Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Absurd Trolley Problems

neal.fun

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 951 posts

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#211

Post by codefreeordie »

woodruffw wrote: post #18
thirdplace_ wrote: post #16

59% would sacrifice their own life for five people? Someone been messing with the votes.

I selected that one. Not because I'm particularly selfless, but because I think it's morally wrong to throw the switch whenever doing so amounts to killing someone, even when inaction results in more death.

I tend to feel that is the general answer, but that at some (arbitrary) level of absurd disparity of outcome, it becomes morally imperative to act.

Like that 5-to-1 standard trolley problem is a hard question for me to answer, and on different days, I pick different answers. Probably "do nothing" most days. But if you made it 50,000,000-to-1, it is not a hard problem any more. Somewhere in between those two is "the line" where the fact that you are becoming a murderer is outweighed by the value of the life you saved.

Yes, if I could be certain that I could save 50,000,000 lives by murdering someone, I think it would be a moral imperative to do so. That wouldn't change the moral evil of murder, it just outweighs it.

I think. Don't ask what I'd do "in real life", I won't know until it happens (which I pray it will not)

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#212

Post by Sirened »

tyrantalope wrote: post #76
Semaphor wrote: post #19

I wonder what the explanations are for 18, most people killed the robots. Assumption of backups? Or caring about your own species more?

I don't value them equally as human life. I'm anti robot I guess

Yep, it's essentially the same question as the cat vs the lobsters. Most chose to save the cat, and that's not exactly surprising given the western context of cats as companion animals. We just value some lives more than others.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#213

Post by JetAlone »

ConstantVigil wrote: post #117

Kill count: 84 Apparently I solved philosophy? Im gonna assume that title stays the same for everyone lol. So, explanation for why so high. Simply put; I don't believe 5 people really got tied to those rails each time. They are in on it somehow. If so, that is sick and twisted they would tie someone else to the rails purposely. So they deserve the trolley instead. Now on the chance that they really are all innocent;…

I got 46...

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#215

Post by [deleted] »

codefreeordie wrote: post #194
ipnon wrote: post #189

My favorite variation is: A trolley is heading towards a line of people corresponding to every natural number. You can pull a lever and divert the trolley towards a line of people corresponding to every real number between 0 and 1. What do you do?

Mathematics [hey-o] But actually, if you choose "pull the lever" after having done the maths, then you are probably a misanthrope. Either that or you believe very strongly in the theory that if you do nothing you're not involved. But really, you're just a misanthrope.

[deleted]

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#216

Post by atq2119 »

pcthrowaway wrote: post #154

Level 10 (pulling the level speeds up the trolley, reducing the suffering of the 5 people who are going to get run over anyway) is basically the argument for legalizing assisted suicide. Of course, I pulled the lever (I guess it's a bit different in that I didn't get consent from the people, but presumably the difference in their lifetime was miniscule, and the entire remainder would have been dread of impending deat…

This is an interesting one that really drives home just how dangerous it is to try to learn from trolley problems.

Yes, if you have perfect information, speeding up the trolley is likely the merciful thing to do.

In real life, you never have perfect information. Speeding up the trolley is definitely the wrong thing to do because it reduces the amount of time that you and others have to find an alternative solution that might save somebody.

(I still agree with your point about assisted suicide. Our points are compatible.)

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#217

Post by pluijzer »

everfree wrote: post #98

I'm surprised to see the popular answer to Question 3. > Oh no! A trolley is heading towards 5 people. You can pull the lever to divert it to the other track, but then your life savings will be destroyed. What do you do? Over 70% chose to pull the lever and destroy their life savings. People die of preventable causes in developing countries today. By choosing not to donate your life savings today to help them, you ar…

My guess is that it is a question about responsibility. In the trolley problem it is my responsibility to pull the lever or not. If I don't lose my money people will die. In real life it is the responsibility of everybody. Maybe still very egocentric not to donate but at least your conscience can let you sleep at night.

An interesting take on it is that if, for example you have 90.000 in savings you could choose not to pull the lever and use your savings to save 20 people in Guinea, but also this would not be a popular choice I guess.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#218

Post by duskwuff »

ravi-delia wrote: post #8

Ending with a contextless kill count was the perfect touch. This feels almost as profound as it is silly, but I'm not sure how meta-level the profundity is. Lovely site for sure

I just wish they'd included the complete kill count, not just the people. "You killed 85 people, one painting, and five lobsters." Or whatever.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#220

Post by throwaway742 »

ConstantVigil wrote: post #117

Kill count: 84 Apparently I solved philosophy? Im gonna assume that title stays the same for everyone lol. So, explanation for why so high. Simply put; I don't believe 5 people really got tied to those rails each time. They are in on it somehow. If so, that is sick and twisted they would tie someone else to the rails purposely. So they deserve the trolley instead. Now on the chance that they really are all innocent;…

I only got 58. Anyone get lower?
Post reply on HN