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

421–430 of 951 posts

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#421

Post by eurasiantiger »

mcv wrote: post #402
_nalply wrote: post #319

This was quite easy for me. The principles: 1. Only pull the lever if you are sure. With an action you assume responsibility for the outcome. 2. Don't believe everything what you see or are told. If you doubt do nothing. Imagine you killed many people because you have been lied to and pulled the lever. In this case it is better you did nothing. 3. An action of yours might kill someone. This is a very heavy responsibi…

I noticed I kept switching between several principles. Possibly triggered by the details of the problem. Some of the principles: 1. If you're able to act, you are already responsible for the outcome. Inaction is a choice too. There's no intrinsic moral difference between pulling the lever or not. 2. Acting from a position of ignorance is irresponsible. Better not to act than to take the risk of making the situation w…

Imagine being at a railyard at the time of a crash and being seen throwing a switch in front of a moving train.

There’s no real-world case where that person is not considered responsible.

Not to mention that trains really cannot go over switches at speed. A runaway trolley would probably derail at the switch if it was set on the side track.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#422

Post by mcv »

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…

One of the problems did have people who tied themselves to the track, while the other person stumbled. Most people chose to let the group that chose to be on the track die.

Another interesting problem would be 5 people tied themselves to the track in front of the trolley, and 1 person tied themselves to the other track. Everybody tied themselves to the track, so should you let the one die instead of the 5? Or did the one tie themselves to the track believing that track was safe, while the other 5 tied themselves to the track expecting to die?

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#423

Post by Aeolun »

mcv wrote: post #364
paxys wrote: post #12

Level 20 was weird. It was a choice between letting a trolley run as normal ("emits CO2, kills 3 people in accidents over 30 years") or running it into a brick wall and decommissioning it. For some reason more people picked the latter. So, they just dislike public transit? What about the emissions and death rate when everyone switches to cars instead? Goes to show how easily the context and exact wording of a questio…

Yeah, that one made it clear how much context matters. These problems pretend there's no context, but we always look at them with some subconscious context in mind. In this case, I did pull the lever, because it could be replaced by an electric trolley. But if killing the trolley means more cars and more car accidents and CO2, then of course we should keep the trolley. But if we ignore context and just look at kill 5…

Eh, it doesn’t matter how old the people are, really. They have all already gotten to experience the joy of life. The baby hasn’t, so they have the most to lose.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#424

Post by Aeolun »

eurasiantiger wrote: post #421
mcv wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed I kept switching between several principles. Possibly triggered by the details of the problem. Some of the principles: 1. If you're able to act, you are already responsible for the outcome. Inaction is a choice too. There's no intrinsic moral difference between pulling the lever or not. 2. Acting from a position of ignorance is irresponsible. Better not to act than to take the risk of making the situation w…

Imagine being at a railyard at the time of a crash and being seen throwing a switch in front of a moving train. There’s no real-world case where that person is not considered responsible. Not to mention that trains really cannot go over switches at speed. A runaway trolley would probably derail at the switch if it was set on the side track.

I think it’s reasonable to assume the trolley goes fast enough to do the deed, but not fast enough it couldn’t round the bend.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#425

Post by Ekaros »

langitbiru wrote: post #353

Well, in China they ask this trolley problem. If you were a son, would you save your mother or your gf? The "correct answer" is your mother. "China's ministry of justice later posted the "correct" answer: exam writers are duty-bound to save their mothers. It would be a "crime of non-action" to choose romantic love over filial duty. " https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-34377611

From Western perspective that might seem strange.

But I think this trolley test might be extended to pull a lever to kill man instead of a woman. Which to I think we have some very sad notions of equality...

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#427

Post by dvh »

It's easy for me: never, under any circumstances operate railroad equipment. You can't possibly know what is on the other track or what it will do to the train, you could kill thousands. Even if railroad ceo is standing besides you you have no way of verifying it. Seriously, don't touch railroad equipment, people will die!

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#429

Post by SpEd3Y »

Andrzej Sapkowski in the Witcher books, through Geralt, said something that might apply to this situation: "Evil is evil [...] Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I’m not a pious hermit. I haven't done only good in my life. But if I’m to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all"

Thoughts? :)

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#430

Post by Aeolun »

JonathanFly wrote: post #21

>Oh no! Due to a construction error, a trolley is stuck in an eternal loop. If you pull the lever the trolley will explode, and if you don't the trolley and it's passengers will go in circles for eternity. What do you do? 50% of people pull the lever?!? I hereby declare that if I'm ever going to be stuck in a trolley for my entire life, I do NOT want the lever pulled. Toss me a smartphone charger and my life wouldn't…

Hmm, I reasoned the same way. I wouldn’t want the lever pulled. So I won’t pull the lever for other people.

I imagine I’d rather go insane from eternity than die for oblivion.

I’m also fairly certain I’ll change that opinion as time goes on, but that doesn’t affect my current decisionmaking.

Post reply on HN