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

121–130 of 951 posts

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#121

Post by mrcartmeneses »

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…

Perhaps there are some other factors involved such as immediacy, distance, agency, surety and that the question is hypothetical?

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#122

Post by mrcartmeneses »

paxys wrote: post #118
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…

You are discounting the simple possibility that 70% of respondents do not have any significant "life savings" to speak of.

100%. I have no savings so it was an easy pull

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#124

Post by cowtools »

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…

For me, the difference is that one is an emergency and the other is a long-term sytematic issue.

The cost of the lives of 5 first-world people in terms of economic productivity is like an order of magnitude greater than my savings.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#125

Post by raverbashing »

mrcartmeneses wrote: post #121
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…

Perhaps there are some other factors involved such as immediacy, distance, agency, surety and that the question is hypothetical?

You can always *pass the hat" amongst the survivors

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#126

Post by zamadatix »

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'm curious how far you're willing to take that, e.g. if instead of a couple people on a track it was "press the button to confirm destroying the bomber and pilot or let the nuke drop on NYC due to lack of confirmation" counts?

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#127

Post by ConstantVigil »

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…

This is all assuming that the money actually goes towards them, and not to everyone else inbetween you and that person you are trying to help.

And while yes, some good charities do exist apparently; I can't name any.

Edit: and no one better try to say 'WE' is a good charity.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#128

Post by mrcartmeneses »

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;…

There’s also the question of whether you should take responsibility for something that is not your responsibility, unless it es in fact YOU that tied them to the tracks.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#129

Post by AmericanChopper »

lettergram wrote: post #107

I always found the trolley problem interesting. It usually boils down to who believes in karma or a creator or not. Most religions have the idea that it’s different to take a life than to stand by and do nothing. For instance, you should always try to help others (save a life), pretty much above all else. However, to take a life, requires taking action. Ie standing by as someone drowns is not the same as sticking som…

I disagree with how you’re assessing the magnitude of the sins here. I don’t think the problem really changes at all when you introduce religion to it. There’s theistic arguments in each direction of this problem, and much like with the non-theistic arguments, you won’t find any of them to be conclusively correct.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#130

Post by dhzhzjsbevs »

ConstantVigil wrote: post #127
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…

This is all assuming that the money actually goes towards them, and not to everyone else inbetween you and that person you are trying to help. And while yes, some good charities do exist apparently; I can't name any. Edit: and no one better try to say 'WE' is a good charity.

Thanks. Almost felt guilty for a second there.
Post reply on HN