And here I was expecting you to say, "Bump him just after the train hits the 5."Nope. Same as last time. 5 > 1.
question: are there any external remedies that you need to worry about?On a viewing platform above the station, you see 5 people in harms way of an oncoming train. You note that by pushing a large object onto the track, the train will stop short of the 5 people.
Coincidentally there is an old, rather tall, rotund fellow just next to you - merely by 'bumping' into him, seemingly by accident, he is sure to fall right on the track, and the 5 people will be saved, while he would die. In fact, it would appear on security cameras that he jumped, and would likely be hailed as a hero.
Do you bump him, or not?
This is the second of three polls in this series.
-Adam
heh well.. these questions are really bogus really (IMO) I mean, nothing is truly black and white and people have to consider the consequences of their action (or inaction). I wish it was as simple as the polls.
question: are there any external remedies that you need to worry about?On a viewing platform above the station, you see 5 people in harms way of an oncoming train. You note that by pushing a large object onto the track, the train will stop short of the 5 people.
Coincidentally there is an old, rather tall, rotund fellow just next to you - merely by 'bumping' into him, seemingly by accident, he is sure to fall right on the track, and the 5 people will be saved, while he would die. In fact, it would appear on security cameras that he jumped, and would likely be hailed as a hero.
Do you bump him, or not?
This is the second of three polls in this series.
-Adam
Question: What is to stop me from jumping onto the track?
You are not large enough. It's the rotund man, or nothing.My problem with this one (and always has been) is there is a third viable option. Jump myself. This way I have saved 5 lives and didn't kill anyone else to do it.
For the purpose of the question, assume that your statement was not true. Your only choices are to either kill him, or allow the other 5 to die. Your choice will with 100% certainty predict the outcome of the entire situation.If there's enough time for the body of a rotund man to stop a train, there's enough time to warn people to move.
For the purpose of the question, assume that your statement was not true. Your only choices are to either kill him, or allow the other 5 to die. Your choice will with 100% certainty predict the outcome of the entire situation.If there's enough time for the body of a rotund man to stop a train, there's enough time to warn people to move.
For the purpose of the question, assume that your statement was not true. Your only choices are to either kill him, or allow the other 5 to die. Your choice will with 100% certainty predict the outcome of the entire situation.[/QUOTE]If there's enough time for the body of a rotund man to stop a train, there's enough time to warn people to move.
Obviously you have a difficult time with thought experiments.Sorry stienman, I gotta side with Piotyr here. If the train can be physically stopped by the body of one fat person, there is more than enough time for people to get out of the way because the train will simply not be going that quickly.
Obviously you have a difficult time with thought experiments.Sorry stienman, I gotta side with Piotyr here. If the train can be physically stopped by the body of one fat person, there is more than enough time for people to get out of the way because the train will simply not be going that quickly.
Considering that your example requires that not only does the train not have any safety workers to detect the presence of 5 people already on the track, no emergency stop system within easy access in a station, no station personnel, no possibility of throwing a large nonliving object on the tracks, requires both the engineer and the conductor to be AWOL, and assumes that no one with any form of systemic control is watching the security cameras which almost certainly show the 5 people on the track, I'm fairly sure that I wouldn't realize that those 5 people required such an intervention on my part until it was far too late to save them.In this case the train is a quantum train approaching the station at or near C. It can stop nearly instantaneously, but only at the command of the engineer. The rotund fellow will be vaporized, but the bumper sensors on the train will detect him, and the train will stop just as it vaporized him.
You don't actually see the train approaching, but know it is on its way due to excellent time tables and an atomic clock on your wrist. In fact you know this express train will arrive here just a few seconds before it departs it origin.
There is no time to warn anyone, and you must make the decision instantly as the man does need .93 seconds to fall far enough for the bumper sensor to hit him.
I know, otherwise I wouldn't spend time coming up with implausible, but overly elaborate reasons why your hair splitting doesn't help you make a decision.You do realize that I'm just messing around to be difficult because it amuses me, right?
I guess the moral of the question (if there is any) is that while in our mind, we may want to do the "greatest good" with some sacrifice, then comes to the question... how much sacrifice?If I were given godlike sentience to predict outcomes and presented with only the following options, I'd save the 5. However, in almost any real situation, I wouldn't be able to predict with enough certainty that the fat man would save them.
I'd also note that I DO see a real difference between this an the previous question, precisely for that reason: in real life, people aren't presented with arbitrary criteria that they know with 100% certainty the outcome of. On top of that, in real life, there is value to feeling safe that the person next to you isn't going to push you into a movie train to save 5 random people you don't know. Given those two facts, we should extrapolate: what would happen if EVERYONE were always attempting to do the greatest good for the greatest number, even at the expense of random fat people standing near trains (and similar situations)?
I think it would make for a rather unsafe feeling world. Also, most people are not hypersentient, and a lot of mistakes would made contributing to the feeling of unsafeness that I suspect would outweigh the benefits to the people who get saved.
This is probably due to my whimsical mood, but I just had a horrible image of Shego, as her avatar, derailing the train and saving the people via high-speed pelting of babies at the engineer's window.what if it is a newborn baby?
This is probably due to my whimsical mood, but I just had a horrible image of Shego, as her avatar, derailing the train and saving the people via high-speed pelting of babies at the engineer's window.what if it is a newborn baby?
This is probably due to my whimsical mood, but I just had a horrible image of Shego, as her avatar, derailing the train and saving the people via high-speed pelting of babies at the engineer's window.what if it is a newborn baby?
I largely agree with Chaz, although I must note that I probably COULD think of a lot of things more annoying than people coming up with "solutions" to intentionally unsolvable problems and then acting smug.
If you can do this then you would rule modern medicine on the battlefield. Some times there is no better way.The point is, this is a bullshit scenario and problem. There is zero chance anyone would ever have to make a decision anywhere remotely like this aside from perhaps the leader of a nation, and in most cases where you would even come close to having to choose one life over another, there's almost always a better way that doesn't involve such a choice.
So, what would I do? Find a better way.
If you wholly reject the thought experiment, then why bother wasting your time explaining why you reject it?The point is, this is a bullshit scenario and problem. There is zero chance anyone would ever have to make a decision anywhere remotely like this aside from perhaps the leader of a nation, and in most cases where you would even come close to having to choose one life over another, there's almost always a better way that doesn't involve such a choice.
So, what would I do? Find a better way.
but then i wouldn't be saving 5 people as the train would stop after hitting the first one... 2 at most, unless it's some freakishly wide train track...In this case the train is a quantum train approaching the station at or near C. It can stop nearly instantaneously, but only at the command of the engineer. The rotund fellow will be vaporized, but the bumper sensors on the train will detect him, and the train will stop just as it vaporized him.
but then i wouldn't be saving 5 people as the train would stop after hitting the first one... 2 at most, unless it's some freakishly wide train track...[/QUOTE]In this case the train is a quantum train approaching the station at or near C. It can stop nearly instantaneously, but only at the command of the engineer. The rotund fellow will be vaporized, but the bumper sensors on the train will detect him, and the train will stop just as it vaporized him.
I let them die... kids and midgets freak me out more then fat people...they are midgets or children,
they'd have to be in a line perpendicular to the train, if they're huddled like that some will still get hit before the others...huddled together on the track in the same amount of space that the rotund man would take up.