Immiment Death Question

[meiloyn]

Re: Immiment Death Question

This question phrased in a more reasonable manner:

There are 5 random people tied to a railroad track. You don't know them. You can't even tell who they are. A train is heading straight for them. But there's good news! You are at the station and you can pull the switch to divert the train from its present track. The bad news? One person is tied to that track.

Do you pull the lever?

For almost everyone, the answer is yes, we pull the lever. Why? You're saving more lives that way. It's pretty obvious. There are some people who wouldn't pull the lever, but they are the anomoly.

Now consider this similar situation: There are five very sick people in a small town with a doctor. These people will die if they do not get organ transplants. Each of them needs a different, vital organ, but there are none available. A wanderer comes into town and visits the doctor. The doctor finds out that this person's organs are compatible with all five of the dying people. So the doctor questions the wanderer, and it turns out the wanderer has no family, no friends, nobody knows where he's going and nobody cares that he left. He's truly a nomad.

Should the doctor steal the wanderer's organs (which would kill him in the process) and save the five dying people?

For most, the answer is no.

Think about why that is. It's the same situation, when it comes down to it: Five lives saved for the sacrifice of one. But why is it that most people would say yes to the first situation, and no to the second?

From my perspective, it has to do with being proactive or reactive. In the first situation, you need to REACT and flip the switch. In the second situation, you actually have to kill a person, thus being PROACTIVE.

For the title question, I would push the lever part way, so neither person gets hit.

For the train question, yeah, I'd flip the switch. Of it the control was there, I'd stop the train altogether.

For the organ question, yeah, I'd use that guy's organs. Nobody cares about him, so who cares?

[Sera13]

Re: Immiment Death Question

I am not to hot on the whole playing god thing.. I would not do anything in either situation. It is not place to tinker around in other peoples lives. Some how these people have gotten themselves into this situation with no doing on my part. I will simply leave it up to fate to let things work themselves out. Even if that means standing aside and wathcing people die, While i watch another walk away unharmed. For reasons beyond my knowledge This is what was ment to happen to these people. I think getting what is coming to me for not helping the ones about to die, and letting the lucky one walk away is much better than having to deal with possible repercussions of changing the entire course of all those peoples lives.

[Cyanite]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Some how these people have gotten themselves into this situation with no doing on my part

In accordinance with the question, somehow you've come to be in front of the lever, as well, with or without any doing on your part.

Chrissi brought up a good point that I'm surprised nobody thought of before. Though fate brought those people in front of the train headed to them, fate also brought you in front of that lever to make a choice. If it didn't, you obviously wouldn't have any part in it.

And Jamuko, I'm not saying this is a completely logical situation, I know there are other driving factors and they're definitely open for debate. I, however, personally don't see any of those factors being strong enough to kill 5 people for the sake of one person.

Who are we to decide who lives and who dies? Would you save five elderly people and sacrifice a child?

1. The way I see it, we have been faced with a choice, so we might as well make one.

2. That argument, again, is bringing up the argument of some lives being more "valuable" than others, based off of life left to live, previous accomplishments and capacity for future accomplishments. I'd really rather not get into that argument, as it really doesn't apply to this debate unless you start filling random values into the variables (the variables being who the people about to be killed/saved are).

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Immiment Death Question

You're missing the point. You aren't "killing five people to save one person" in any of these situations. Ever. You are, however, killing one person to save five in many of these situations. You're only guilty of killing when you take an action, and killing an unwilling person is always more wrong than letting an unwilling person die. Even five people.

The act itself carries a weight in these considerations, not just the type of people we're saving or not saving.

[Hepcat06]

Re: Immiment Death Question

You're missing the point. You aren't "killing five people to save one person" in any of these situations. Ever. You are, however, killing one person to save five in many of these situations. You're only guilty of killing when you take an action, and killing an unwilling person is always more wrong than letting an unwilling person die. Even five people.

The act itself carries a weight in these considerations, not just the type of people we're saving or not saving.

That's as simple as it needs to be. You are killing someone. Simple. Done.

[Cyanite]

Re: Immiment Death Question

You're only guilty of killing when you take an action

The way I see it, neglecting to take any action when you have the option to right in front of you is an action in itself.

I'm not missing any point, I'm just not agreeing with your interpretations. You say that you're innocent only if you let those 5 people die. By altering the course, you're directly guilty because you interfered with the original state to cause harm to someone that otherwise wouldn't be harmed.

I understand that completely. I just don't agree with it.

[Tokzic]

Re: Immiment Death Question

For the title question, I would push the lever part way, so neither person gets hit.

For the train question, yeah, I'd flip the switch. Of it the control was there, I'd stop the train altogether.

You realize that you're just dodging the actual question? There's no "nobody days yay" option in any of these because it's an ethics question.

Chrissi basically said this already, but as to the "Fate brought them there, so you can't interfere" standpoint, the definition trumps the argument. The main idea behind fate is that all events that occur are destined to do so. Therefore, it is impossible "interfere with fate" because fate controls everything we do... including the events that you consider "interfering".

The "why" argument is bugging me a lot. "How do you know they aren't being punished for something?" The problem itself is defined as spontaneous - saying that a speeding train or a falling metal comet is "punishment" for anything is completely moronic. Even if you believe in karma, if those five deserve to die over the one, then karma will make the one at the lever stand there and gape, or else not present them with the choice at all.

As for my choice, without knowledge of the identities, I would definitely involve myself to save the five. Yeah, it sucks a lot to be the one, and I'd definitely feel extraordinarily guilty doing so, but it seems much more righteous to victimize one random life in place of five. If people are leaving it just because it would make them involved, I would consider them pussies.

If it comes right down to it, if I was the single person on said platform, I would insist that they pull the lever. It would be arrogant and selfish for me to consider my life more valuable than five others.

[Ice wolf]

Re: Immiment Death Question

EDIT:Now that I've read through the thread, I change my mind. I would leave the decision up to destiny. Like it's been said before, there could be five senior citizens and a baby. Who isn't to say that if that baby lives, then he/she will be very succesful in life and change the world in a good way?

[MixMasterLar]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Situation:
A gigantic metal ball is in freefall in the sky, headed straight toward a party of 5 people who stand unprotected on a platform. When it lands on them in a few seconds, they will surely be crushed. On another platform, one person stands alone safely. You stand 100 feet away from each platform with no equipment. A lever is at your side. If you pull it, the two platforms will instantaneously switch positions, putting the previously safe person in grave danger and freeing the five people from any danger. You do not know the identities of the people. They could be strangers, friends, celebrities, family, enemies, etc, but you do not know.

Question:
Would you pull this lever?

Why/why not?

I would not pull the level. I would either search for another way or just pray that God picked the right Platform to crush. If I saw the ball in time, I might kick the lever as I ran by, switching the platforms, and push the one man off.

I will now go back and read the other post.

[sammo123]

Re: Immiment Death Question

i would pull it ones death is five others lifes

[MixMasterLar]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Read some of the last few post. If I couldnt ran in time (like five secs choose) then I would be forced to pull the level and beg God for forgivness

In real life, I probably just stand there dazed

[Cyanite]

Re: Immiment Death Question

You guys are completely missing the point now.

This isn't a challenge as to "How do you save the people in time?". It's an ethics question that brings up the topic of some lives being more "valuable" than others, and if it's worth it to intervene to kill one person for the sake of 5 or vice versa.

The whole "instantaneously" point was put in there to ensure nobody came up with little strategies to save everyone, that's not the point of the thread.

[Tokzic]

Re: Immiment Death Question

You realize that you're just dodging the actual question? There's no "nobody days yay" option in any of these because it's an ethics question.

EDIT: Dammit Cyanite!

[Shambo]

Re: Immiment Death Question

I'd pull it, 5 people worth more than one although you can't put a price on life...



unless it's slavery

[MixMasterLar]

Re: Immiment Death Question

You guys are completely missing the point now.

This isn't a challenge as to "How do you save the people in time?". It's an ethics question that brings up the topic of some lives being more "valuable" than others, and if it's worth it to intervene to kill one person for the sake of 5 or vice versa.

Then to give a final answer: I would pull the level. I would either be guilty of killing five people with the action of standing there or I would be guilty of one. It's no easy choice, At first I thought the way kilroy said (your not apart in it if you dont pull the level) But somehow I doubt that's what God thinks.....in the end you gotta pull that level.