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 think the chatbots are actually sentient.
Absurd Trolley Problems
51–60 of 951 posts
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#52>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…
How you going to eat buddy? You want the explosion option, or the starve to death option?
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#53The thing is that when you pull the level, you're interfering so you're the cause of the consequence after pulling the lever. If you don't pull the lever, you're not responsible for what happens, at least in my opinion. That's why in the basic case of a trolley heading towards 5 people or 1 person, I wouldn't pull the level no matter what because at least the deaths of the 5 people aren't my fault, but the death of t…
Apparently we’re in the minority together. Cynically (and practically) there’s also the legal side to think about. If you cause a person to be killed by a trolley, you will at minimum be sued into oblivion. If you do nothing no legal case can realistically be levied against you.
Edit: a fun part of the trolley problem not really explored here is how inconsistent most people’s logic gets when the outcomes are effectively the same but the actions are slightly different. For example, what if instead of pushing a button you had to shoot the person on the tracks? What if you could kill someone today who is going to shoot up a mall tomorrow? More fun, what if you could push a button to kill a millionaire and redistribute their wealth to save 100 families in subsaharan Africa?
Logically, as soon as you go down the path of actively choosing to kill a person to achieve some “greater good”, you’ve really thrown an awful lot of morals out the window.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#54Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#5559% would sacrifice their own life for five people? Someone been messing with the votes.
Why is that so hard to believe? There are innumerable stories of people sacrificing themselves for other people. Everything from throwing oneself onto a grenade to having kids.
That is often to save people you know and care about, not complete strangers.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#56The thing is that when you pull the level, you're interfering so you're the cause of the consequence after pulling the lever. If you don't pull the lever, you're not responsible for what happens, at least in my opinion. That's why in the basic case of a trolley heading towards 5 people or 1 person, I wouldn't pull the level no matter what because at least the deaths of the 5 people aren't my fault, but the death of t…
>If you don't pull the lever, you're not responsible for what happens, at least in my opinion.
I disagree. I think there's some point at which minimal effort from you for appreciable reward for others puts an obligation on you. And that's precisely the reason the trolley problem is so popular.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#57The question regarding baby vs old people was really telling. It’s practically the argument for / against abortion. What’s strange to me is that someone would choose to kill five people who are capable of thought instead of an undeveloped human being. But I suppose that’s why we’re seeing the reversal of Roe v Wade being supported. Sigh, fuckin religion.
I took it as simply 1 full life expectancy vs 5x remaining life expectancy of a senior citizen. Put a few more older people on the tracks and I'd pick the other switch.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#58The question regarding baby vs old people was really telling. It’s practically the argument for / against abortion. What’s strange to me is that someone would choose to kill five people who are capable of thought instead of an undeveloped human being. But I suppose that’s why we’re seeing the reversal of Roe v Wade being supported. Sigh, fuckin religion.
I think a common utilitarian way of thinking is years of life left. A baby has a far greater expected value of remaining years and thus is often assigned higher moral value by people. For me it was a no-brainer to kill the old people, although I was imagining them as very old such that they each only had ~5 years left on average.
Mostly agreed. But in another society that values the wisdom of their elders, then they could see that as a large loss. Where-as the baby is replaceable with very little cost to society. I wonder if the stats would be different in an Eastern society.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#59I wonder what the explanations are for 18, most people killed the robots. Assumption of backups? Or caring about your own species more?
The robots don’t look to be tied down. Neither does the cat.
Why the robots choose to get involved with murderous trams is another question…
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#6059% would sacrifice their own life for five people? Someone been messing with the votes.
Why is that so hard to believe? There are innumerable stories of people sacrificing themselves for other people. Everything from throwing oneself onto a grenade to having kids.
No post body was provided.