Question

...

Again and again, I submit for your consideration that the Trolley problem is the problem.

The Trolley problem is a quesitionable mental thought excercise (read my dreamatorium example).

I have other terms for it, but I am wondering what other voices have to say before I weigh in.

asked on Sunday, Mar 14, 2021 10:56:37 PM by

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Reason: Books I & II

This book is based on the first five years of The Dr. Bo Show, where Bo takes a critical thinking-, reason-, and science-based approach to issues that matter with the goal of educating and entertaining. Every chapter in the book explores a different aspect of reason by using a real-world issue or example.

Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
Kaiden
3

Hi, Robert!

         I am piecing together your view of the Trolley Problem from bits and pieces found in your other posts, so just let me know if I’m not understanding you correctly. You seem to think that the problem is set up in such a way that you must agree to certain repugnant premises in order to even consider the moral dilemma. For example, the Trolley Problem requires that you imagine yourself driving a Trolley and requires you to choose one forked path that will result in running over either one or ten workers who are standing on the tracks. And within the context of the scenario, you are being placed in this situation without your consent (you don’t consent to being given the wheel of a Trolley with faulty brakes). Not only are you required to accept these repugnant premises in order to consider the dilemma, but it seems that the most moral thing to do is exactly to not drive a Trolley that has faulty brakes, but to instead empty it of passenger send it straight to the shop.

         In a word, you think the trolley problem is itself problematic because of the repugnant premises, lack of consent, and immorality that constitute the very setup and consideration of the dilemma. Is that right?

         Now, I have not personally seen the Trolley problem laid out in quite the way you have described. The typical statement of the Trolley problem is that you are witnessing a trolley speeding towards a junction because the driver has lost control. The junction lever is set so that the Trolley’s current path will lead it to collide with five unwary workers standing on the tracks, further down the way. You notice that you have easy access to the lever by which you may switch the path of the Trolley to a different track with one unwary worker standing on it, further down the way.

         In this typical statement of the scenario, you are not the driver, nor was the Trolley allowed to leave the station under the knowledge that it had faulty breaks. Suppose they broke while the Trolley was approaching the junction. Nor is it clear that your consent is needed for anything, since it is just that you happen to be close to a lever that could switch the tracks. I don’t think your concerns are relevant to the typical statement of the Trolley problem.

answered on Monday, Mar 15, 2021 12:52:30 AM by Kaiden

Kaiden Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
0
account no longer exists writes:

Thank you for your effort in tracking down my interpretation of the Trolley problem.

It is to me as it always been inreoduced to me from the very beginning. 

A so-caled mental experiment. 

My example to you was not intended to be a hypothetical extension of that but rather an escape from it.

 

posted on Monday, Mar 15, 2021 01:38:11 AM
...
0
account no longer exists writes:

My objection to the Trolley problem is not as a soft science  diangnosis tool to determine mental illness for filling up a library bookself or expert witness box in the courtroom, but outside the role of that, which my examples posted on this website have been taken down.

posted on Friday, Mar 26, 2021 02:06:03 AM
...
0
account no longer exists writes:

Here is a win-win solution to Trolley problem and strips the thought experiment down to the bone to its absurdity, as it applies outside its intended medical use as a tool to diagnose mental illness:


The Trolley's brakes have failed and is heading down hill at a terminal speed. 


You are the operator and before you to the right track are a group of Roman Soliders and to the left, Jesus Christ himself (either if he appears to as a Christian or as a Muslim or other faith).


Now, which direction do you drive the Trolley? 


Whatever your choice, you know it will result in death -- However, no matter your decision, it is the right one.


Work it out in your mind, heart and faith.


Now, I have thought up of this scenario to hopefully extract the Trolley operator from the wreckage  of the Trolley problem thought experiment. 


That's why I say from the very beginning, never borard  the Trolley problem, as the hypothetical people you kill are not real. 


Only, you are real and made the only real victim of the malpractice of sociologists and psycologist that apply that tool outside their mental practice of their black (my metaphysical) medical bag. 


It is my Kobeyashi Maru solution to the Trolley problem thought experiment. 

posted on Friday, Mar 26, 2021 04:21:11 AM