Original Post
The train conductor's choice(Ethical dilemma)
Alright, I'd like you to answer this to the best of your ability, and attempt to justify your answer. Feel free to discuss other people's answers, just keep it soft, this is a discussion, not a debate. You are here to learn, not prove your point.
Here it is:
You are the conductor of a freight train, alone, and realize the train's brakes are shot. There is nothing you can do to repair them, but the train will head up a steady incline and it will eventually stop.
You see 10 men walking on the rails directly in front of you, who don't see the train. On a rip which you can turn into, there is a child playing on the tracks. If you turn, you will kill the child. If you proceed straight, you have a 90% chance of killing each of the men(90% per person). What is your decision, and why do you decide that it is the right choice?
Here it is:
You are the conductor of a freight train, alone, and realize the train's brakes are shot. There is nothing you can do to repair them, but the train will head up a steady incline and it will eventually stop.
You see 10 men walking on the rails directly in front of you, who don't see the train. On a rip which you can turn into, there is a child playing on the tracks. If you turn, you will kill the child. If you proceed straight, you have a 90% chance of killing each of the men(90% per person). What is your decision, and why do you decide that it is the right choice?
Hoss.
You'd think people would be aware enough to get the hell out when hanging around train tracks. But of course, this is a hypothetical so I'll treat it as such.
I'd probably change into the rip, that way only 1 person dies instead of 10. Utilitarian as fuck.
I'd probably change into the rip, that way only 1 person dies instead of 10. Utilitarian as fuck.
Last edited by Laddenvore; Oct 1, 2012 at 05:56 PM.
My first question is why the horn isn't working on the train? :s My second is why don't they feel the vibrations of the train approaching? I'm going to assume, since it's a hypothetical question, that it's more about the killing 1 child or potentially killing 10 men, rather than the blatantly obvious solutions, but whatever. Also, I'm wondering if there's a 100% chance that if the man survives he's horribly injured in some way?
You have a 100% chance to kill 1 person if you choose the rip. You have around a 35% chance to kill 10 people if you keep going. I would choose the rip. It's not worth saving the child's life if any of the men that do manage to survive are horribly disfigured or crippled for the rest of their life. I can live with the life of one child on my hands if I know I've saved 10 people from death or disfigurement. It's not a pretty choice, but if forced to I would make it.
Oddly, what makes me choose the rip is not so much killing less people, but mutilating less people. The death is a done deal if I choose the rip. Death is not a guarantee if I go straight. There's the chance, however small, that all 10 men might actually live. But if they were forced to live forever crippled, for example as quadriplegics, I could not bear to live with the knowledge I doomed 10 men to such an abject existence. I could not bear the knowledge I doomed 1 man to an abject existence. If there was a 100% chance each man escapes uninjured if he doesn't die, I would pick going straight in a heartbeat.
You have a 100% chance to kill 1 person if you choose the rip. You have around a 35% chance to kill 10 people if you keep going. I would choose the rip. It's not worth saving the child's life if any of the men that do manage to survive are horribly disfigured or crippled for the rest of their life. I can live with the life of one child on my hands if I know I've saved 10 people from death or disfigurement. It's not a pretty choice, but if forced to I would make it.
Oddly, what makes me choose the rip is not so much killing less people, but mutilating less people. The death is a done deal if I choose the rip. Death is not a guarantee if I go straight. There's the chance, however small, that all 10 men might actually live. But if they were forced to live forever crippled, for example as quadriplegics, I could not bear to live with the knowledge I doomed 10 men to such an abject existence. I could not bear the knowledge I doomed 1 man to an abject existence. If there was a 100% chance each man escapes uninjured if he doesn't die, I would pick going straight in a heartbeat.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Originally Posted by Laddenvore
You'd think people would be aware enough to get the hell out when hanging around train tracks. But of course, this is a hypothetical so I'll treat it as such.
I'd probably change into the rip, that way only 1 person dies instead of 10. Utilitarian as fuck.
Trains are notoriously hard to hear, if you've been around them a lot, you get used to the noise, or you may become more alert, depending on your conditioning when you hear the noise. The majority of large cities have some sort of train that runs through them, thus lulling people into a false sense of security when around them.
Originally Posted by culapou
tl;dr version
kill 1 child
or
kill 9 men
I'd kill the kid, it's more than likely he will grow up to be like one of the nine men, so might as well save more.
I like your rationale, but, what if it is a little girl? Would you still do the same thing?
Originally Posted by Oracle
My first question is why the horn isn't working on the train? :s My second is why don't they feel the vibrations of the train approaching? I'm going to assume, since it's a hypothetical question, that it's more about the killing 1 child or potentially killing 10 men, rather than the blatantly obvious solutions, but whatever. Also, I'm wondering if there's a 100% chance that if the man survives he's horribly injured in some way?
You have a 100% chance to kill 1 person if you choose the rip. You have around a 35% chance to kill 10 people if you keep going. I would choose the rip. It's not worth saving the child's life if any of the men that do manage to survive are horribly disfigured or crippled for the rest of their life. I can live with the life of one child on my hands if I know I've saved 10 people from death or disfigurement. It's not a pretty choice, but if forced to I would make it.
Oddly, what makes me choose the rip is not so much killing less people, but mutilating less people. The death is a done deal if I choose the rip. Death is not a guarantee if I go straight. There's the chance, however small, that all 10 men might actually live. But if they were forced to live forever crippled, for example as quadriplegics, I could not bear to live with the knowledge I doomed 10 men to such an abject existence. I could not bear the knowledge I doomed 1 man to an abject existence. If there was a 100% chance each man escapes uninjured if he doesn't die, I would pick going straight in a heartbeat.
Lets just assume that the horn has run out of pressure or whatever and is refusing to work. Trains, especially modern trains, tend to be pretty stealthy in comparison to trains you may have seen in movies. They run smoothly. And, don't forget, there is always the off chance that they will be frozen like deer in headlights when they see a mammoth machine bearing down on them.
I do like how thorough you are, and yes, the men would have a chance to get injured, depending on how the train strikes, although it would be hard to put a percentage to it.
Hoss.
