Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Redrumdream t1_isvogr4 wrote

Trolley Problem modification 3 tracks 1 lever: Degrees of immorality when it comes to killing

I was having a discussion with a friend about the levels of murder and morality.

This led to the thought:

If one is decides they are going to kill yet they kill fewer people than someone else, then they are still morally wrong but "less bad."

Some thoughts from the discussion

  1. Killing 1 is morally better than killing 5 and both are better than killing 100 etc

  2. A modification to the trolley problem

There is a trolley on the tracks and there is 3 separate divisions. Track A is empty. Track B has 1 person on it. Track C has 5 people on it.

A lever that defaults to the neutral position controls the rails and can be pulled halfway or all the way with more effort, but once released goes back to the original position.

  • By not pulling the lever the train stays on track A and no one is hit. -Pulling the lever half way and holding it changes the trolley to track B killing 1. -Pulling all the way changes the trolley to Track C killing 5.

If someone pulls the lever halfway are they "less bad" than one who pulls it all the way? Is "bad" even a spectrum? If so is it always a spectrum?

Any insights on this?

0

Gentlerwiserfree t1_it20uhp wrote

What’s the point of this discussion?

You’re trying to decide whether it’s “objectively” less bad…?

Why? To do what with?

There are reasons why there are such things as legal trials. One reason is to establish the facts of the case, and to make sure (with witnesses and evidence) that those facts are accurate. The other is to decide what should be done based on the laws. There’s a reason why laws will give a range of suggested penalties for things, not one absolute correspondence between people injured and time in jail, or what have you.

This reminds me of my response to the Argo problem. That is, “if you change the parts, how much do you have to change before it’s no longer considered the same ship?”

I think it always depends. To what practical purpose are you asking? What practical thing can you do only if it is the same ship?

I don’t think there can be such thing as “objectively, absolutely, the same object” — the object is made of a ton of smaller parts, anyway. How do you even draw the line and say “These things are one object, a Ship”, and “Those things are not one object, they are parts”? You only do it by practicality.

(tl;dr I am not a Platonist)

1