So, the back ground to this, in case anyone doesn't know already, is that in a common ethics problem, a train is going to run over 5 people and kill them, there is however a switch in the tracks that, if activated, would change the trains course and kill only one person. The ethical question here is: do you do nothing and let 5 people die? Or do you switch the track and actively murder 1 person, obviously (or at least to me) there is no right answer as both outcomes would be tragic.
Then enter the innocent child, what choice would he make? Whose lives would he decide are more valuable, honestly I was very interested, what would he choose? Aw, that's so adorable, he wants to save all of the.... oh... ohh.... well I don't know why I expected anything else to be honest...
@Dr Mechanoid, The problem is usually further compounded by hypothesizing that a loved one, usually a spouse or child is the stand in for the single person while strangers comprise the track holding 5.
@Dr Mechanoid, I love pondering about crap like this.
@Dr Mechanoid, I'd pick killing the one person, 4 extra lives saved I guess, even if it was someone I knew :/
@I Dexios Divine I, well you'd want to save your own blood rather than saving the 5 strangers to give your genes a better chance at surviving. It's also commonly seen in wildlife too
@Tipathearrow, thats why choosing to save the other 4 is linked with brain disorder or sociopathy especially if tge one person is really close to you ,for example your son
They literally did this in Infamous, except it was people dangling off a rooftop by a rope and the 5 were doctors and the 1 was your girlfriend/childhood friend.
@Dr Mechanoid, The version I've heard the most is that the one person is a pregnant woman and the five are convicted criminals. You could also derail the train, but it is carrying ten disabled people who will surely perish.
@The New Night Guard, run over to the criminals, and whisper "choo choo motherfvckers"
@Dr Mechanoid, it's a utilitarian issue, an I would choose the more utilitarian path and take out the one, mainly because inaction, to me at least, is still an action.
@Dr Mechanoid, if you don't pull the lever you'll instantly kill 5 people. If you pull the switch, the train goes on a 1000 mile track where the train was replaced piece by piece before running a guy over. Was the train you sent down the track the train that killed him?
Ship of theisius train problem
@NAT, SPOILER ALERT (for an ancient ass game)
except the choice didn't matter she died either way
@The Lost Reference, you are correct. Choosing to do nothing is still making a choice. Boondock Saints talks about the inaction of good men doing nothing as a girl is murder in front of them as a greater evil. Very first couple of scenes. Bad ass movie that if you have never seen you must watch.
@The Lost Reference, there's also a short story called "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" that talk about the perfect city where everyone is happy. But in order for everyone to live comfortably and happily with no worries. One child must suffer in darkness and mud alone.
@Kangaroo Jacked, dude I need more than one upvote, I laughed so hard
@NAT, ehh there's plenty of doctors but only one of my gf xD
@The New Night Guard, how disabled is disabled? XD
@TheColossalTitan, that takes any of the choice out of my mind. Let 5 strangers die or actively cause the death of 1 of my children. Sorry but not sorry strangers.
@Slickrick, Unspecified, just says disabled.
@TheColossalTitan, I've heard a variation where the five are criminals and the one is an innocent person.
@Dr Mechanoid, kill the one. Unless it's a loved one, then do nothing and let the 5 die
@TheColossalTitan, heard it as a baby or 5 adults on charmed. but I feel as though it's not as good because no attachment/emotional aspect for some people
@Dr Mechanoid, well either choice would have that outcome one person was killed so the other 5 including the ones on the train live in guilt for killing someone and vice versa for the other way. So at a minimum 6 people have their life changed in a negative way.
@Googleybody, team kill
@Googleybody, VEHICULAR MANSLAUGHTER
How to tell if your child is a psychopath
We watch this gif. And a lot of people draw to conclusions that the child is aggressive or doesn't care about the death of the people when he moves the one into the path with the other five. But the truth is what I see is a child it simply is trying to learn how the world works around him move the one into the path and watches the objects move out of its path as a push through. It's more of a physics experiment to see the motion of objects for a small child.
But he could have accomplished that with some MULTI-TRACK DRIFTING!
Me as a child.
@daily joke, also me as an adult.
@daily joke, me as a train.
He's done what all of us wish we could do
Preparing for a supervillain scenario
This is why you shouldn't let your kids play GTA.
That kid is going places
I have a deep emotion all connection with this child
CONGRATULATIONS!!! It's a psychopath
in the US, you'd do nothing, the family of the people/person you didnt save would try to sue you for not saving the them
@ng517, you say this as a joke.but sadly this is true. This is what is destroying America. Stupidity like that. By not acting however the family of the 5 would sue you. So either way you're screwed.
"Video games make children violent"
The Trolley Problem. I wouldn't touch the switch. I have no obligation to and doing so would make me an aggressing actor in the death of the one person.
@Doctor Krieger, by not doing anything the act of an action is still in action. Choosing to not choose is still choosing. So either way it goes if you didn't touch the switch you're at fault for the death of someone either one person or five people.
@Seohn, the act of inaction. Typo
that should have said. You are at fault for the number of people killed by not acting. You either saved one but let 5 die. Or saved 5 and let one die. When you are presented with a choice to choise who gets saved. Plugging you ears and walking a away doesn't make you less responsible for who ends up dying. Since you chose to do nothing and chose to save no one. You choose to allow people you had the chance to save, die by choosing to not pull the switch. You may not have killed them directly. But you chose not to save them. So you let them die.
And his philosophy is ones mass murder is in motion it stays in motion