Added: 2 years ago
From: musekiteer
Views: 2,421
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (14)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Comment removed

  • Excellent -- plan to use it in my evolutionary psychology class (even if I have to push a fat man off a bridge to do it).

  • What a good and interesting video! (Even if I've watched it already :D)

  • On pangeaprogress or on the other channel? ;D

  • Pangeaprogress, I think.

  • That's where I found it. I simply downloaded it as an mp3 and "illustrated" it -- which was a great deal more work!

  • My reason for problems with pushing the man from the bridge has to do with complications arising in my brain. I know the man I push will probably be killed, but I *don't* know that his death is going to prevent the deaths of the 5 - for all I know, it's just one more death. Flipping the switch - I don't know if the train will change tracks, I merely hope it will and I'm hoping the person will somehow manage to avoid injury.

    Yes, I know I'm not supposed to think it through. Can't help it.

  • There are also issues with "doing harm". I do no harm in flipping a switch. I do harm in pushing a man from a bridge.

  • YT comments demonstrate that people have great difficulty putting concepts into words, so I suspect that a considerable portion of the incoherence results from being unfamiliar with justifying such thinking, rather than that decisions are solely due to the "linguistic" analogy.

    I think that this is a design flaw. They are not controlling for unfamiliarity with verbalizing automatic judgements for which there is no "written" rule.

    Pushing the man is *active* harm; a track is a given.

  • @musekiteer,

    "Yhey are not controlling for unfamiliarity with verbalizing automatic judgements for which there is no "written" law."

    You are, apparently, very much acquainted with psychology, you should be one of the organizers of such an experiment. :D

  • I would conclude from the 1 : 5 cost : benefit that I *should* push the man from the bridge, but it would be terribly hard to actually do it. It's not a committment in the way that the train is committed to a track.

    The train must go down one track or the other, so better to try. Even if the train doesn't change tracks, at least you tried to save 5.

    I suspect that the actual moral-decision mechanism is *sequential* rather than either-or.

  • After I have finished the "impact of religion" video, I think that I'll make another about the sequencing.

  • Looking forward to the "impact of religion" video.

  • "I 'should' push the man from the bridge".

    Does anybody consider the following: the bystander on the bridge, instead of pushing a heavy man (which is very distasteful to me), throwing him- or herself (if s/he is also 'heavy'), thereby saving lives. Honestly, I did consider this. :)

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more