Current Events > 5 people are stuck on a railway track.There's a rail car coming at them. However

(+) Yeah! (+)

fenderbender321 posted...

dave_is_slick posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Cocytus posted...

If you intervene and cause the death of one person, that's called murder. If not for your actions, that person would still be alive. You won't get hero points that negate that.

I wouldn't consider myself the "cause" of death in that situation. It's an accident either way.

Actively changing something isn't an accident.

Getting stuck on the tracks is an accident.

That didn't address anything...
---

ThyCorndog posted...

I don't think you would be charged with anything if you let the train hit 5 people. You would just have to live with yourself knowing you could have saved them and let just one person die instead

Wait till the family comes to demand charges be brought against you.

DevsBro posted...

*Remember, diverting the car kind of makes you a murderer.

This is the entire debate.

Besides, there's also the matter of whether not diverting the car makes you a murderer.

Not at all. I refuse to actively kill like that. It sucks for everyone else but I'm not obligated to become a murderer for strangers.
---

fenderbender321 posted...

Cocytus posted...

ThyCorndog posted...

I don't think you would be charged with anything if you let the train hit 5 people. You would just have to live with yourself knowing you could have saved them and let just one person die instead

Wait till the family comes to demand charges be brought against you.

If you were on a jury, would you convict in this situation?

I know the hero factor makes it seem that it's alright for you to knowingly and actively kill a person of lesser number. If we ask the jury question, there's many factors that would come into consideration in order to answer the question properly, because they have to go through a lot of pretrial stuff, the charges may be lessened or different, cretain evidence would or wold not be admissible, etc. But, just on the surface, if I were in the jury and they proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the actions led to a death, I'd have to vote guilty. The fact that five other people benefited from your actions is immaterial.

I never said they wouldn't charge you for switching the track to kill the 1 person. I said no one would charge you for leaving things as they are. They might try, but I don't think it would be successful
---

ThyCorndog posted...

I never said they wouldn't charge you for switching the track to kill the 1 person. I said no one would charge you for leaving things as they are. They might try, but I don't think it would be successful

I agree with that. Do nothing, you won't get charged with anything.

fenderbender321 posted...

dave_is_slick posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

dave_is_slick posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Cocytus posted...

If you intervene and cause the death of one person, that's called murder. If not for your actions, that person would still be alive. You won't get hero points that negate that.

I wouldn't consider myself the "cause" of death in that situation. It's an accident either way.

Actively changing something isn't an accident.

Getting stuck on the tracks is an accident.

That didn't address anything...

I'm trying to save 5 people from dying. It's not my fault that some other dumbfuck also had to get his loser ass stuck on the tracks.

So you're still becoming a murderer then. If people getting stuck is an accident, then actively changing the tracks isn't.
---

boxington posted...

eston posted...

Is there a lever I can pull to make all of them die?

eston when he was younger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N_RZJUAQY4

uh oh!
---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

I love all the memes that came of this.

https://www.facebook.com/TrolleyProblemMemes/
---

spanky1 posted...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

I love all the memes that came of this.

https://www.facebook.com/TrolleyProblemMemes/

Interesting article. Thanks.

fenderbender321 posted...

SerperiorThanU posted...

Neither is murder. People throw that term around too much.

Murder is the unlawful killing of another human without justification or valid excuse, especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.[1][2][

This is like saying abortion or killing a hostage taker is murder.
It's funny you brought up manslaughter since manslaughter is what choosing the switch option is at most.

True.

But to even say it's manslaughter....isn't it also legally considered manslaughter if you allow people to die when you had a chance to save them?

Unless you are a first responder or otherwise have a hand in this scenario, you as a regular citizen do not have a duty to act.

Did someone link the Mind Field episode of VSauce yet? Way more people SAY one thing and do another.

It's a free episode of VSauce's YouTube Red series. Episode one, season two.

move the lever to the middle so the empty trolley goes off the rails and misses all six

Second_Chances posted...

move the lever to the middle so the empty trolley goes off the rails and misses all six

Interesting solution.

Cocytus posted...

Second_Chances posted...

move the lever to the middle so the empty trolley goes off the rails and misses all six

Interesting solution.

If that actually works. If not, I'd pull the switch to kill the one person. I'd have to live with myself with the knowledge that someone is dead because of my action, but I think it'd be easier than living with the fact that 5 died due to my inaction. Knowing I saved 5 people would help me sleep better at night. If I happen to be sleeping in prison for manslaughter, so be it.
---

Id leave it be. Me pulling the switch knowing someone would be killed would feel too much like murder.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sl5KJ69qiA

spanky1 posted...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

I love all the memes that came of this.

https://www.facebook.com/TrolleyProblemMemes/

The Good Place had an episode+ heavily focusing on it
---

Doing nothing is still doing something. Yes I would pull the lever.
---

I would minimize loss of life.
---

EpicMickeyDrew posted...

Doing nothing is still doing something. Yes I would pull the lever.

Are you a railway worker? Is it your responsibility to do anything? Do you always favor quantity over quality?

I would leave the level alone. It is not my responsibility, nor could I claim knowledge of how to operate the level, or even know for sure which track the train would go.
---

EpicMickeyDrew posted...

Doing nothing is still doing something. Yes I would pull the lever.

Doing nothing also doesn't make you directly responsible for killing someone.
---

For those of you who won't watch the video, only two of the seven people actually chose to let one die instead of five.

Make of that what you will.

If I was railway worker I would follow whatever safety protocols were in place.
---

bulbinking posted...

If I was railway worker I would follow whatever safety protocols were in place.

This hypothetical does not presume that you are a railroad worker. It does presume that the switch is an obvious option upon seeing it.

Kaname_Madoka posted...

Cocytus posted...

Makeveli_lives posted...

Sada_Pop posted...

You're skewing the poll with last last statement. Take personal bias and feelings out of it...

That's the point of the moral dilemma. You let 5 people die knowing you could've saved them or let 1 person die knowing your the one who killed him.

Bingo

so what? You're being biased and only pointing out why one option is bad.

They're both bad.

You either become a killer of one man or a person who allowed 5 people to die in one person's place.
---

fenderbender321 posted...

Which proves what I was trying to say earlier...that essentially your crime is that you were in position to either make or not make the switch. And since that is a ridiculous reason to charge somebody for a crime, the person shouldn't be charged either way, nor should he be considered a killer or even a manslaughterer by any reasonable person.

This problem is an ethical dilemma not a legal one.
---

So TC do you pay for YouTube Red? I know this was one of the free episodes, just wondering.

fenderbender321 posted...

Because at the end of the day 1 death is better than 5. End of story. Any judge/jury that would convict would be a terrible person. Anyone judging the person or calling him a killer is a terrible person too. Consider the circumstances. It's 1 vs 5. That's all there is to it. Everything else is abstract.

Is that supposed to me mean something? It's never as absolute as that.
---

dave_is_slick posted...

Is that supposed to me mean something? It's never as absolute as that.

1 is definitely better then 5. Only turns into a debate when you tell people that limiting it to one death makes them a murderer.
---

Makeveli_lives posted...

dave_is_slick posted...

Is that supposed to me mean something? It's never as absolute as that.

1 is definitely better then 5. Only turns into a debate when you tell people that limiting it to one death makes them a murderer.

Not when you actively choose to kill someone else instead of letting things be.
---

https://xkcd.com/1455/
---

Is there a reason i shouldn't save 4 people??? What am i missing here?
---

TheGrindery posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sl5KJ69qiA

The second season was such an improvement on the first.

And I really liked the first season.

Makeveli_lives posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Which proves what I was trying to say earlier...that essentially your crime is that you were in position to either make or not make the switch. And since that is a ridiculous reason to charge somebody for a crime, the person shouldn't be charged either way, nor should he be considered a killer or even a manslaughterer by any reasonable person.

This problem is an ethical dilemma not a legal one.

So, is it ethically better to let 5 people die, so the one dying anyway wouldn't feel bad dying alone?

This is no dilemma in any way, if we know for a fact that the switch is the only thing you can do. Its either YOU killing 5 people by doing nothing, or killing 1 and doing something.
---

Sami1000 posted...

Is there a reason i shouldn't save 4 people??? What am i missing here?

Actively killing someone.
---

Sami1000 posted...

Makeveli_lives posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Which proves what I was trying to say earlier...that essentially your crime is that you were in position to either make or not make the switch. And since that is a ridiculous reason to charge somebody for a crime, the person shouldn't be charged either way, nor should he be considered a killer or even a manslaughterer by any reasonable person.

This problem is an ethical dilemma not a legal one.

So, is it ethically better to let 5 people die, so the one dying anyway wouldn't feel bad dying alone?

This is no dilemma in any way, if we know for a fact that the switch is the only thing you can do. Its either YOU killing 5 people by doing nothing, or killing 1 and doing something.

I'm not a killer.
---

Sami1000 posted...

Makeveli_lives posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Which proves what I was trying to say earlier...that essentially your crime is that you were in position to either make or not make the switch. And since that is a ridiculous reason to charge somebody for a crime, the person shouldn't be charged either way, nor should he be considered a killer or even a manslaughterer by any reasonable person.

This problem is an ethical dilemma not a legal one.

So, is it ethically better to let 5 people die, so the one dying anyway wouldn't feel bad dying alone?

This is no dilemma in any way, if we know for a fact that the switch is the only thing you can do. Its either YOU killing 5 people by doing nothing, or killing 1 and doing something.

Whether you see it or not, this is a well-documented moral dilemma for most people.

Stay out of it by doing nothing and five people will die.

Exercise personal agency over the situation and intentionally cause the death of one person.

That's a real dilemma for many.

dave_is_slick posted...

Sami1000 posted...

Makeveli_lives posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Which proves what I was trying to say earlier...that essentially your crime is that you were in position to either make or not make the switch. And since that is a ridiculous reason to charge somebody for a crime, the person shouldn't be charged either way, nor should he be considered a killer or even a manslaughterer by any reasonable person.

This problem is an ethical dilemma not a legal one.

So, is it ethically better to let 5 people die, so the one dying anyway wouldn't feel bad dying alone?

This is no dilemma in any way, if we know for a fact that the switch is the only thing you can do. Its either YOU killing 5 people by doing nothing, or killing 1 and doing something.

I'm not a killer.

Sure. Lett someone fall from heights, "it was the gravity hur hur"
---

Sami1000 posted...

dave_is_slick posted...

Sami1000 posted...

Makeveli_lives posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Which proves what I was trying to say earlier...that essentially your crime is that you were in position to either make or not make the switch. And since that is a ridiculous reason to charge somebody for a crime, the person shouldn't be charged either way, nor should he be considered a killer or even a manslaughterer by any reasonable person.

This problem is an ethical dilemma not a legal one.

So, is it ethically better to let 5 people die, so the one dying anyway wouldn't feel bad dying alone?

This is no dilemma in any way, if we know for a fact that the switch is the only thing you can do. Its either YOU killing 5 people by doing nothing, or killing 1 and doing something.

I'm not a killer.

Sure. Lett someone fall from heights, "it was the gravity hur hur"

Oh you're one of those types.
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

Sami1000 posted...

Makeveli_lives posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Which proves what I was trying to say earlier...that essentially your crime is that you were in position to either make or not make the switch. And since that is a ridiculous reason to charge somebody for a crime, the person shouldn't be charged either way, nor should he be considered a killer or even a manslaughterer by any reasonable person.

This problem is an ethical dilemma not a legal one.

So, is it ethically better to let 5 people die, so the one dying anyway wouldn't feel bad dying alone?

This is no dilemma in any way, if we know for a fact that the switch is the only thing you can do. Its either YOU killing 5 people by doing nothing, or killing 1 and doing something.

Whether you see it or not, this is a well-documented moral dilemma for most people.

Stay out of it by doing nothing and five people will die.

Exercise personal agency over the situation and intentionally cause the death of one person.

That's a real dilemma for many.

If their death is 100% happening, you know for 100% sure what that switch will do and how it is the only thing that can save one of them, then there is no dilemma. You're either killer of one, or killer of five.

You can argue about legal bullshit or whatever you want, but you know you killed them by doing nothing. Would be different if you would be in danger by trying to save them, but if all it takes is pulling one switch then there's no question about it.

If we added the numbers little bit higher. Let's say there 50 people and one would die, or better yet, let's say your entire family or one dies. You still find some dilemma there? You wouldn't feel like you just killed your entire family if you did nothing?
---

Those railcar levers require strength I lack so I couldn't move it to begin with
---