Would you kill your best friend?
Image from Mark Schaefer at Pixabay
Is the title a bit dramatic? Perhaps I overstepped the mark or should I have placed: Would you kill a family member?, but I suppose it would also have an effect on ethics and morals when making a decision, a condition that possibly has not been taken into account in this exercise.
Not long ago, I made a comment (as usual) to a particular post, this post was about the dilemmas and decisions that a human being must constantly make and many times we drown in a glass of water when we try to decide which option is best to make.
Every day we are always making decisions, which shape our past, present, and future. Possibly that's why it's so hard for us to decide on the best option. All decisions have led us to where we are today. However, many of us get stuck thinking or making a decision and often we decide not to do anything (which is also a decision). That post reminded me of the train dilemma.
Let's take a look about this dilemma
The train's dilemma
The dilemma is as follows, a train goes in a hurry along a rail where there are 5 people tied up, but you have the opportunity to activate a command on the train's control panel to take a different rail and avoid killing those 5 people. The problem now arises because the new track will run over 1 person. Would you activate the command? Would you kill 5 or 1? (Obviously, it is a simpler panel than the one shown in the image).
This is an exercise conceived by the British philosopher Philippa Ruth Foot, who was against consequentialism, which bases its theories of ethics on the following premise: an action is judged good if it generates the greatest good possible, that is, if the amount of good surpasses the amount of evil. In short, the morality of an action depends only on its consequences, and here appears the famous phrase: the end justifies the means (Niccolò Machiavelli).
We usually measure important decisions that way, don't we? Remembering what Spock would say
Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few
Therefore the correct action would be to activate the command to divert the train and kill only one person.
But for Philippa Foot, morality comes from people's virtues and principles. So the act of killing (even one person) would be considered a bad decision. So from my point of view, that person would not do anything, therefore, he/she would not be guilty of not killing anyone?
What would you do? Does this dilemma have a solution?
The previous experiment, most people choose to save 5 people and kill 1. Although there is a smaller group that decides not to do anything (will they be virtualists?).
Have you thought about what your decision would be? I would also decide to activate the train's command and avoid killing the 5 people. However, if the person is a relative of mine... It is regrettable what will happen to the 5 people...
Especially if it's my best friend. I'm sorry for all of you, 5 strangers, you will die. I guess I’m a virtualist.
Well, hold your thoughts ...
There is another version created by the philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson, which changes things for all of us, who follow Spock philosophy (consequentialism, more specifically utilitarianism, where the best action is the one that maximizes utility).
This woman (women always creating controversies), changed the rules of the dilemma. The same train is going to run over the 5 people, but now to avoid this catastrophe, you will have to push a very fat man over the railroad tracks, in such a way that by his weight the train will stop (obviously killing the fat man).
It's the same scenario, either you kill 5 or you kill 1. But this experiment changed the results of the previous one. The utilitarians wrinkled... (as we would say here, in my country, hehe), that is, the utilitarians refused to push the fat man.
The point is that now you have to physically kill someone, which is why there are very few who decided to do it. Perhaps not only the virtues play a role in the moral decision, the mere fact of thinking that I will be imprisoned for killing a fat man, who possibly dies of obesity, will avoid my action of pushing him.
What do you think?
Again, thank you very much for joining me so far.
Keep spreading the Steemit love 
Project Hope Venezuela is an initiative created to grow.
You See more about it at:
Our previous posts:
- Artificial Intelligence to our rescue?
- Consensus algorithms: PoW & PoS
- How will the overwhelming discovery of extraterrestrial life affect our lives and beliefs?
- If homosexuality really were a disease and was removed with a vaccine, would homosexuals take it?
- Blockchain Life the number one event in the cryptographic community -
- Behavior and evolution of cryptocurrencies ten years after its creation / What to expect from them in the future?
- The "crypto-arepas", alternative in the middle of depressing situation.
- Robotic AI: "exoskeleton a modern miracle"..
- Resilience: key to overcoming adversity
- Discipline, implications and applications
- Monetization of networks and networks based on blockchain
- Letter to my love, Steemit
- IEO´s The New ICO´s
- Letter to my love, Steemit
- Feelings Disuse: Empathy
- Let's take Steemit to The Real World
- Steem Blockchain´s Economy: DEVALUATION
Hi @jadams2k18, thank you for your memo.
I had the same discussion with friends a while ago. It is really hard to decide and I think a lot of people would be "selfish" and rescue a close one instead of strangers.
I only heard the test with 5 alcoholics and 1 doctor. The doctor can save lives while the others are bad in the eyes of our society O.o
I hope none will ever come to such a decision because either way you go you have to live with the consequences.
Cheers,
Max
Yes, in the end, you have to live with the consequences.
However unreal they may be, they are decisions similar to those that can be confronted by leaders (presidents), the military, firefighters, rescuers.
Thanks for commenting
Now this is very interesting, I have thought a lot about writing a similar sort of post to this, more about the value of life.
In the one i have been thinking about, there are 6 people, you know nothing about any of them, you have to chose one to die, and how knowing more about those peoples changes it, and changes it again and again and again. But ultimately, is all life not the same? Does it not all have the same value? Knowing nothing, i would kill one to save five, but then things like the age of the people is one of the only factors that might actually make a difference to me. What knowledge would change it for you? Would you let a train run over 1 murderer to save 1 child? But then.. you are a murderer... what if that person was considered a murderer because they had done exactly the same thing. Will you be the push-in-front-of-the train option for the next person?
Would you kill 5 people in their late 90s to save a 3 year old? Or 5 people with terminal cancer to save a 16 year old? I would argue life is life, and is has the same value regardless of who's life it is, the only factor would be how much life there is. Life can't be assigned value, my life isn't worth more than anyone else's.
I was a child when i first encountered this same issue. I reached a conclusion then i would stand by today.
If someone had my dad, and someone elses dad (dad perspective cos this was something i thought about as a kid) and i could only save one, could i save my dad knowing i had taken someone elses dad from them? I know my dad would forgive me if i didn't chose him, he would have wanted to be there for me but could i inflict the same level of hurt onto someone elses, to avoid it myself? I don't think i could, i think at least knowing i was bearing the hurt of it so someone else didn't have to would at least help.
To me, that is the crux of adding a family member to this question. Would i save my one best friend, and kill 5 unknown strangers, and put that hurt that i would go through on everyone who cared about those 5. A life isn't just its own, it belongs to everyone who loves it. So i would either have to know everything about everyone, which in reality is impossible to do, or say the value of life is equal and always save the greater number.
But then, would you save 1000 convicted criminals, or 1 doctor? the doctor might save more 1000 lives, the criminals might take lives, but who am i the judge the value of those lives? I don't know what they may or may not do in their lives, or what they may or may not influence in others. I don't know for real until it i am there, no one would really. i think about it a lot, but i still can't say for sure. So in that sense, it is better to know nothing about the people. 1000, vs 1 with no facts about the people - easy, save 1000. Some of the facts about the people but not all of them - impossible as you don't know what you don't know, and what you know could be misleading (the doctor may not even be a medical doctor, but as soon as i hear doctor, that was what i thought of). all of the facts - hard, but possible, and easier to live with.
if there was the option to swap myself for the person, i think i might do that, i know all about me, and exactly who i would be hurting by doing that, and i would struggle to do that to my family, but i don't think I could do to 5 other families instead. That said, there in the moment, i don't know.
I love your long comments
You've analyzed the situation quite a bit. Life is priceless and precious.
Deciding who dies and who doesn't, is very difficult, however, as I have already mentioned in other comments, there are those who make this kind of decisions in their work.
For my part, I would hate to take a job where I have to make these kinds of decisions. The burden is too heavy.
I'm glad you stopped by
Brilliant comment @calluna
Upvoted
Huge dilemma..!!
Posted using Partiko iOS
With the first scenario:
First of all why are all these people playing the damn train track or just standing their?
The modification of the first one, and the solo person is my family member.
Let's look at the third preposition that the fat man would be pushed in front of a train.
Fun thoughts. Thanks for get my brain moving on a Monday morning!
I'm going to hang out by some train tracks now and try to save people. :P
Hahahah... You made me laugh a lot! man
Actually, in the real exercise, you are told that there is a psychopath who has tied 5 people one track and 1 in the other track. That's why they can't be detached from the track by themselves. And you are the one who can
And in the other exercise, you are told that the fat man is fat enough to stop the train. I also thought it must be impossible to move that fat guy. I guess you have to take a strong impulse, run and hit the fat guy hard to get him on the track.
Thanks for coming by
Seriously brilliant comment
upvote on the way @jacuzzi :)
Hello my dear @jadams2k18. Generally many of us are slow when making decisions, this is due to the ability to reason we have.
The dilemma raised implies a transcendental decision in the lives of 6 people, which makes it very difficult to decide.
In my particular case I must confess that I would need a lot of time to make a decision like that, so I do not know what I would do.
Take care!
That's right, my friend. But when you have the time to think about what decision you would make, let me know your answer
@jadams2k18 has set 1.500 STEEM bounty on this post!
Bounties let you earn rewards without the need for Steem Power. Go here to learn how bounties work.
Earn the bounty by commenting what you think the bounty creator wants to know from you.
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Happy Rewards Hunting!
Congratulations to the following winner(s) of the bounty!
Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.
Hi @jadams2k18
First, whatever the replies; most people will NOT act- simply out of the fear of becoming tainted with death.
Second, the question about actually killing someone to avoid a worse fate misses one point- there is no right choice. Both ways you are a loser- either a coward and indecisive person OR a heartless amoral being.
Third, how much ever we try to 'induce' the atmosphere of pressure and tension- it cannot be duplicated. Let me explain: If I say a bullet hit my arm, breaking a lot of bone and tissue- This explanation of what happened cannot even come close to the ACTUAL experience. The violence and pain cannot be conveyed, imagined at most but never really conveyed. The point: If I cannot duplicate conditions, the results are unreliable at best.
PS: Blow up the train!!!
Heeeelllooooo, my friend @sarez!!!
Yeah! That's what I'm talking about! Hahahha...
That's totally true my friend.
The situation is very difficult to answer, but I suppose they are the kind of decisions that a president, a captain, a general or any other commanding person should know how to make or at least not be paralyzed when choosing an alternative. Don't you think?
I'm glad you took the time to stop by
blog up the train? :) best solution ever @sarez :)
What do I think?
Where am I standing that I can watch this all and am able to push someone in front of the train?
Honestly speaking it depends on the people standing there.
Fat or tiny will be no reason to push them to stop the train so a group of terrorists can be saved.
They won't be grateful anyway.
I have family members left I will gladly push in front of the train if that saves some (good) people.
Since I am a woman and can change the rules but not the fact we live in a man's world and I can push someone else in front of the train, I am close enough to step in front of the train myself and stop it that way.
Why killing someone else if you can do the job yourself? I am fit enough to crawl over and it will be a relief (which is living with killing an innocent person is not).
💥💕
Posted using Partiko Android
Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Let me see if I understood what you said. I suppose that if you go inside the train, you would activate the command so that 5 people don't die. Right?
I'm assuming that since you're only talking about the fat man's version. So, in the fat man's version, you are telling me that you would throw yourself instead of pushing the fat man? Interesting.
What terrorists are you talking about? All 5 people are innocent people.
Living with the burden of having killed a person must be very hard and even traumatic.
If it comes to saving someone we always judge by what we see/think. We never are really objective.
If it comes to just the title you used the answer is: yes.
Killing can also be a deed of love.
If it comes to family the answer is yes too.
If I can save someone by stepping in front of the train my answer is yes too. If I can push someone I can go myself too.
Case number one... I would not sacrifice 1 to save 5... By the way are these 5 all deaf too they cannot hear the train come?
The story is hard to believe.
Besides: the Sheppard cared more about the 1 (lost) lamb as all sheep's (does not make sense either).
💥💕
Posted using Partiko Android
Hahaha. Sorry, the real exercise tells about a psychopath who tied up all those people. They can not move.😅
I like the way you think 😉💕
So a psychopath tied 5 people up on the railroad and is watches/waits/asks me what choice I make?
Pushing him (the one person) and save those 5 (how fast is that train driving to untie these 5 in time?)...
Jumping in front of it myself and?
Psychopaths never can be trusted are (high) intelligent and easily fool people (including shrinks) and are charming.
Somehow the story does not make sense.
Thanks 💥💕
Posted using Partiko Android
Charming??? Oh my!
Remember me, where's the Stockholm Syndrome from?
I'm kidding! 😄
The situation is designed for you to make the obligatory decision to kill 1 or 5 people. They are exercises designed by philosophers and perhaps psychologists. Crazy people. 😜
At first thank you for this valuable post. In my opinion if anybody push that fat man there happens a creation of will. That means if not any intervention happens the fat man will live. On the other hand in the dying of 5 people do not include our mistake. The reason do not change the result. If anybody push fat man kills fat man. In the dying of 5 there is only one person who ties them has responsibility
For one situation or another, you are responsible for both the death of the Fat Guy and the death of the 5 people. You have to choose which one will be. It's a hard choice.
I saw something on tv with train dilema and other things about how people are influenced by first seconds and how they taking decision but all that change when is about family. I don't know what i would do, i hope i will never get in the position were i have to choose
Posted using Partiko Android
When a loved one is involved, everything changes. But your answer is the most human: never had to make a decision like that.
Thanks for commenting