Kinda stupid discussion. The difference is obvious. The difference is controlling the object of destruction versus becoming the object of destruction. If I switch the lever it is still the train that kills the man. If I push the man, it is me that kills the man. In the bridge scenario you have positioned me to forcing action on someone else. There is no mystery in this discussion.
There's an obvious option missing. You could jump, in place of the man on the bridge, stop the trolley, and save the workers. You wouldn't push a stranger when you could jump yourself!
This is a nonsense hypothetical with no true solution. It tries to reduce human beings into a number equation. It is a stupid mind game that totally ignores the complexity of life, relationships, impulses and morality. All persons who give an answer to this problem are self-delusional fools. And that includes you!
Isnt there a comparison between this scenario and the ones natural life photographers face...ie. to intervene and save animal's life from a predator. They will be saving an animal but then would be taking vital food source away from predator (which might mean death for predator through hunger).
So those photographers just leave things in nature's hand and let the scenario play itself.
Did this in R.E today, its fucking awesome. I would NOT pull the lever, as who am i to tempt fate? Have you ever watched the box?! Also, i could never end another mans life, by pushing him. Fat or thin. It is MURDER.
I wouldnt pull the lever or push the fat guy...in both scenarios the blood of that one guy will be on my hands. The bottom line is that its not ok to save a life by killing another.
why to crash?! the one person cant jump to the sand down and save his live?!
Krallify 1 month ago
uh, pushing the man off the bridge? Cold hearted much?
TheOfficialRusher 1 month ago
ummm,,,people? pushing a person off a bridge, AND infront of an out of controle trolley? can we say.......murder? duh
bfs1888 2 months ago
RUN BITCH, RUN isn't an viable option?
HeerBadkuip 2 months ago
Kinda stupid discussion. The difference is obvious. The difference is controlling the object of destruction versus becoming the object of destruction. If I switch the lever it is still the train that kills the man. If I push the man, it is me that kills the man. In the bridge scenario you have positioned me to forcing action on someone else. There is no mystery in this discussion.
MachetePanda 4 months ago
#1 Let 4 die, because I'm a sadistic bastard. #2 Let 4 die, because I'm a sadistic bastard.
Foreignhedgehog 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
in the case of the fatman the right moral choice to make
is too sometimes push him
if you always push him, fat men will stop standing on railway bridges
and then the 4 will always have to die
if you never push him the 4 will always die anyway
but if you push him sometimes
then potentially the 4 will be saved the most because the fat man is pushed often but not often enough that the choice is removed
by always choosing you may create the conditions in which the choice is eventually removed
MrJellyJars 8 months ago
It would depend on who the victims were.
aphonseya1 9 months ago
There's an obvious option missing. You could jump, in place of the man on the bridge, stop the trolley, and save the workers. You wouldn't push a stranger when you could jump yourself!
humphrey23 1 year ago
@humphrey23 Given that you are as fat as that person
tarcal87 9 months ago
Or you could just yell: GET OFF THE TRACK
givemeabreak432 1 year ago 15
@givemeabreak432 your answer was the smartest one that i have seen so far.
lolabronson1 4 months ago
This is a nonsense hypothetical with no true solution. It tries to reduce human beings into a number equation. It is a stupid mind game that totally ignores the complexity of life, relationships, impulses and morality. All persons who give an answer to this problem are self-delusional fools. And that includes you!
BJDrift 1 year ago
Isnt there a comparison between this scenario and the ones natural life photographers face...ie. to intervene and save animal's life from a predator. They will be saving an animal but then would be taking vital food source away from predator (which might mean death for predator through hunger).
So those photographers just leave things in nature's hand and let the scenario play itself.
AaTkw 1 year ago
Did this in R.E today, its fucking awesome. I would NOT pull the lever, as who am i to tempt fate? Have you ever watched the box?! Also, i could never end another mans life, by pushing him. Fat or thin. It is MURDER.
BaileyAndro 1 year ago
The difference between pushing a button or pushing the guy brings in the "pilote syndrome" phenomena..
Kenzofeis 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Its not ok to save a life by killing another
AaTkw 1 year ago
Comment removed
AaTkw 1 year ago
The bottom line is that its not ok to save a life by killing another.
AaTkw 1 year ago
I wouldnt pull the lever or push the fat guy...in both scenarios the blood of that one guy will be on my hands. The bottom line is that its not ok to save a life by killing another.
AaTkw 1 year ago
@AaTkw is it not selfish to allow four people to die simply because you don't want blood on your hands?
rashad9607 1 year ago
kill four -laughs evilly-
lvanciel 1 year ago
This is the funniest representation of this problem. I laughed while people died on trails. This is not good! Don't make videos like that LOL.
ricardas83 1 year ago 4
my epa teacher showed me this vid...
chik5197 2 years ago
very interesting. where is this from?
zportee 3 years ago