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

821–830 of 951 posts

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#821

Post by dwringer »

pizza234 wrote: post #550
Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legally perhaps, but morally, I've never gotten why so many people think that the physical act of pulling or not pulling makes so much difference. It's a binary decision with two outcomes, in my personal view it is irrelevant which of the outcomes is caused by physical action and which by inaction (at least, supposing that you have enough time to think about what to do - obviously, if you have to react in a split sec…

> I've never gotten why so many people think that the physical act of pulling or not pulling makes so much difference. By pulling the level, one is intentionally killing a person, to save five. In more general terms, a life is taken away for the greater good of society. A foundation of societies (modern ones, and I guess, some more than others) is that taking a life away has highly specific restrictions, which are us…

Interestingly the website poll indicates two thirds of people would not pull the lever to have the train run over themselves to save five people. So if you ask the guy on the other track, he seems unlikely to assent to pull the lever in time to save the other people.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#822

Post by jefftk »

layer8 wrote: post #618
jgerrish wrote: post #363

This kind of highlights a subtle interactive design or user experience component of the Trolley problem. Part of the Trolley Problem is that the choice is between an action or inaction. But these problems, or the first one at least, have two buttons. So you're making a choice. Yeah, some might argue it's a technicality. But what if you put the Do Nothing choice on a timer? What if you made it an asynchronous "Problem…

The problem is to pick a timeout long enough to allow the player to at least read through the description and understand the situation, but not so long that players gets impatient and pick the “action” because they don’t want to wait (and there are no real stakes on the website). A timeout could distort the results more than the current version.

You could click a button when done reading, and then be presented with a 4s timer counting down to "don't pull the lever"

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#823

Post by simplify »

jgerrish wrote: post #363

This kind of highlights a subtle interactive design or user experience component of the Trolley problem. Part of the Trolley Problem is that the choice is between an action or inaction. But these problems, or the first one at least, have two buttons. So you're making a choice. Yeah, some might argue it's a technicality. But what if you put the Do Nothing choice on a timer? What if you made it an asynchronous "Problem…

> But what if you put the Do Nothing choice on a timer?

This is actually done in the game Dr. Trolly's Problem[0]. This technicality is interesting enough such that a streamer creates his own internal rule around it to handle issues of morality[1].

[0] https://store.steampowered.com/app/773830/Dr_Trolleys_Proble...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dabWpa-FwUo

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#824

Post by sneak »

com2kid wrote: post #798
sneak wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On what basis do you assert that not pulling is also an act? It seems to me that you are asserting inaction == action which, to me, is false.

> On what basis do you assert that not pulling is also an act? A student not doing their homework is an action, correct? That is why their grade is penalized, for not acting. If someone doesn't turn on the fan in the bathroom during a shower and the walls get moldy, that is an inaction that the person will be blamed for!

The student opted in to school and the responsibilities associated thereto.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#825

Post by filoleg »

bobbylarrybobby wrote: post #712
pizza234 wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never gotten why so many people think that the physical act of pulling or not pulling makes so much difference. By pulling the level, one is intentionally killing a person, to save five. In more general terms, a life is taken away for the greater good of society. A foundation of societies (modern ones, and I guess, some more than others) is that taking a life away has highly specific restrictions, which are us…

Wasn't the contract already broken when six people ended up tied to train tracks?

Yes, it was broken, but by someone else, not me. I am not at (moral) fault for someone else breaking the contract.

But if I pull the lever (or pushed a fat man onto the track that would halt the train), I am the one who is responsible for the resulting death, which makes me the one who broke the contract.

That's the major dilemma here, because pulling the lever is the utilitarian-correct choice that saved more lives, but whoever pulled the lever went from being innocent to being a murderer.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#826

Post by sbuttgereit »

oniony wrote: post #527
Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legally perhaps, but morally, I've never gotten why so many people think that the physical act of pulling or not pulling makes so much difference. It's a binary decision with two outcomes, in my personal view it is irrelevant which of the outcomes is caused by physical action and which by inaction (at least, supposing that you have enough time to think about what to do - obviously, if you have to react in a split sec…

I guess because there's more wiggle-room with a non-action. If you don't pull a lever, you could argue there wasn't time to pull the lever, or that you were frozen with fear or whatever. I think non-actions are judged less harshly than actions, so people are more inhibited in making them..

There's more perceived wiggle-room with rationalizations, not actual wiggle-room.

The only moment in the scenario that matters is when you've made your choice and as others have said: it's binary. You pull the lever or you don't. The moral act is in making the choice, not what comes after. In that moment of choice you've expressed a hierarchy of your values.

Now, you might value most highly your own mental well-being, and making the most of that by rationalizing to yourself that you didn't actually make the choice that you just made. You might value your social standing or legal disposition the highest and make the choice accordingly. etc.

Of course, the scenario itself is a bit silly and not the kind of everyday living guidance that one will most likely have thought deeply about in anything than abstract moralistic terms. It's pretty rare to face that sort of scenario with that kind of consequence.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#827

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

dlp211 wrote: post #816
mensetmanusman wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think like you until I learned about how ethical frameworks are different when you are being extorted. This trolley problem is a class of extortion because your choices are very limited and out of your control. For example, it wouldn’t be wrong if someone forced you to steal a package of bubblegum or else they would kill your family and you decided to steal the bubblegum instead of inaction. In this case, i…

Your point is taken, but I want to point out that an ectopic pregnancy will never become a child (fetal death is guaranteed) and almost always fatal to the mother if not removed.

Cool, now tell this to conservative politicians and evangelicals that still consider the removal of an ectopic pregnancy to be abortion and morally wrong.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#828

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

sneak wrote: post #613
mensetmanusman wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think like you until I learned about how ethical frameworks are different when you are being extorted. This trolley problem is a class of extortion because your choices are very limited and out of your control. For example, it wouldn’t be wrong if someone forced you to steal a package of bubblegum or else they would kill your family and you decided to steal the bubblegum instead of inaction. In this case, i…

That seems to assume that the action to save the mother is the assumed preferred outcome, and the one that would be chosen? I am saying that it isn't wrong to choose inaction, either.

In the case of ectopic pregnancy, choosing inaction is absolutely wrong in every possible way.

Inaction means both mother and fetus die. Action means just the fetus dies.

I don't see how you could possibly defend inaction. The fetus is going to die either way.

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#829

Post by jodrellblank »

dwringer wrote: post #821
pizza234 wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never gotten why so many people think that the physical act of pulling or not pulling makes so much difference. By pulling the level, one is intentionally killing a person, to save five. In more general terms, a life is taken away for the greater good of society. A foundation of societies (modern ones, and I guess, some more than others) is that taking a life away has highly specific restrictions, which are us…

Interestingly the website poll indicates two thirds of people would not pull the lever to have the train run over themselves to save five people. So if you ask the guy on the other track, he seems unlikely to assent to pull the lever in time to save the other people.

Well, right now a surgical team are able to kill you and transplant your organs to save five people. Do you consent?

(Do you 'pull the lever' and instruct the surgical team to kill one stranger to save five strangers?)

Re: Absurd Trolley Problems

#830

Post by jonathankoren »

There was a trolley meme (actually about student debt forgiveness) that had a long line of people dead, more live people, and the cut off to no one. The dilemma was, “You can pull the lever, and save everyone, but would that be fair to everyone that was already killed?”

I really like that one.

Post reply on HN