- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29598
06 Nov 15
Originally posted by lemondropDo i owe the friend money?
a friend is walking down some railroad track unaware that a train is approaching
on another track are two strangers
you could save your friend by diverting the train
but it would kill the two strangers
what would you do?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29598
06 Nov 15
Originally posted by lemondropAs much as i would like to save my friend, i don't think i would take any action if it led to the deaths of others, even strangers.
I would choose my friend however
the choice would become much more difficult if a child was substituted for the two strangers
joking is welcome but some serious discussion would be nice
Originally posted by lemondropi would pick option C
a friend is walking down some railroad track unaware that a train is approaching
on another track are two strangers
you could save your friend by diverting the train
but it would kill the two strangers
what would you do?
slow the train to a halt by throwing forum moderators under the wheels, hopefully get them all
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 326101
Originally posted by lemondropWhy can you only save the friend or the two strangers? Why couldn't you alert the whole lot at once?
a friend is walking down some railroad track unaware that a train is approaching
on another track are two strangers
you could save your friend by diverting the train
but it would kill the two strangers
what would you do?
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
06 Nov 15
Originally posted by lemondropA clean and uncomplicated variant on the Trolley Problem. I don't know what I would do.
a friend is walking down some railroad track unaware that a train is approaching
on another track are two strangers
you could save your friend by diverting the train
but it would kill the two strangers
what would you do?
I think based on only the information given, there are two moral questions raised. The first is whether an act of commission (in this case, diverting the train) is in itself morally equivalent, morally better, or morally worse than not taking action. I think that they are morally equivalent.
The second is whether letting one die to avoid the death of two is morally justified by friendship with the one. I don't think it is, but I would definitely be torn.
It might depend on the strength of the relationship, such as marriage, parent/child, etc. Having made a personal lifetime commitment to the well being of another, which is itself morally permissible, might control.
06 Nov 15
Originally posted by lemondropSpirituality or Debates would be better.
I would choose my friend however
the choice would become much more difficult if a child was substituted for the two strangers
joking is welcome but some serious discussion would be nice
I have my GF hat on here. (Its pink with lime green polka dots)
