Ethics Poll

What do you do? (Read the Text first)

  • Total voters
    56
If i had time, i would try my best to convince the fat man to jump, but if this was a quick moment, i would probably shocked, and stand there watching
 
If I was that fat man,you'd neve convince me to jump.

What would you do if you were the fat man, and the thin guy asked you too jump? Would you throw him off, with 25% chance, or jump?
Remeber he might try and push you off.
 
If i were the fat man i'd say screw it and go home and eat a sandwiche
 
Well, I know what I would do if I were Spiderman though.
 
i would have pushed the fat guy.. he would've died of being out of shape in a few months anyhow... or just being overweight
 
Probably do nothing, cover my eyes and cry....you see, the brave thing to do.
 
Prince of China said:
I doubt either one of us could stop the train.
Click to expand...

O rly?

Someone give this guy a science award.
 
Hell, I'd push the other guy if there weren't 5 people to save.
 
I don't find murder ethical, sorry.

I wouldn't push the fat man. There's no guarantee pushing the fat guy would stop the train, and even if the other people survived, i'd live with the torment of my murder for the rest of my life. Who am I to kill one to save several?
 
Raziaar said:
I don't find murder ethical, sorry.

I wouldn't push the fat man. There's no guarantee pushing the fat guy would stop the train, and even if the other people survived, i'd live with the torment of my murder for the rest of my life. Who am I to kill one to save several?
Click to expand...
The only one with the power to do so. Are you responcable for someones death, if you watch them die and do nothing, when fully empowered to save them. I'd say yes, but what if you're not fully empowered, are you still responcable?
 
Solaris said:
The only one with the power to do so. Are you responcable for someones death, if you watch them die and do nothing, when fully empowered to save them. I'd say yes, but what if you're not fully empowered, are you still responcable?
Click to expand...

Dude, you're twisted if your idea of 'doing something' is pushing somebody in front of the train.

I think my lack of pushing somebody in front of the train is better. I don't murder somebody in the process of attempting to save others, when chances are those others will still die.

We can't solve everything in life... we're not 'responsible' for doing the irresponsible thing such as murder. Sometimes you just have to sit back and watch as life does its cruel thing... You can't save everybody, but you sure as hell can try not to murder people in the process of trying to save those people.

The point i'm getting across? It's not your ethical duty to kill somebody to save others. People die, deal with it... don't become a murderer trying to devise some whacky way to save people who may be about to die.
 
when chances are those others will still die.
Click to expand...
By pushing the fat person theres a 90% chance it will stop the train.
 
Solaris said:
By pushing the fat person theres a 90% chance it will stop the train.
Click to expand...

Re-read what I said. Read it carefully.

You may not be a hero if you don't stop the train, but you'd be a murderer if you did, by pushing that guy.

The choice is to either do nothing, find something else to do that doesn't involve murder, or to throw yourself. At least kill yourself... don't take the life of some poor overweight guy to try to be some sort of hero.
 
Intresting. What if the chance of the fat guy stopping the train was 100%, he doesn't want to die, but you could easilly push him off.
 
I'd push the guy.

The lives of 5 people > 1 person, regardless of girth > any guilt I have afterwards.
 
Why would I want to save those people?

Why would I want to kill that man?

I do nothing.
 
Solaris said:
Intresting. What if the chance of the fat guy stopping the train was 100%, he doesn't want to die, but you could easilly push him off.
Click to expand...

I don't think you've been hearing anything I have been saying.

Saving the lives of 5 people, does not justify murder. You wouldn't feel good inside, you'd feel like a murderer.

People die all the time, you can't save them all... people die all over the world for small things, some for big things. If one person had to be murdered for every five saved, the world would be an awful place. Nobody would trust anybody, because with people around who would be willing to murder you, to save others... no thanks. Those people don't have my respect. Murder does not a good hero make.
 
Raziaar said:
I don't think you've been hearing anything I have been saying.

Saving the lives of 5 people, does not justify murder. You wouldn't feel good inside, you'd feel like a murderer.

People die all the time, you can't save them all... people die all over the world for small things, some for big things. If one person had to be murdered for every five saved, the world would be an awful place. Nobody would trust anybody, because with people around who would be willing to murder you, to save others... no thanks. Those people don't have my respect. Murder does not a good hero make.
Click to expand...
Hmm. What if no-one would ever know you pushed him.
 
Solaris said:
Hmm. What if no-one would ever know you pushed him.
Click to expand...

*I* would know... I would have to live with the torment of knowing I killed another human being.

And so what if others didn't know? What... so I could be touted around as a hero? I'm not into that game, thank you very much... not if I knew I'd done something awful.
 
I wouldn't do anything. I would pretend I didn't see anything and be on my way.
 
Intresting. Bvgasm voted in the poll.
 
I am not so arrogant as to think that I'm more important than five mortal men.

Of course, if I were actually in that situation, why not untie as many people as possible? If I could get three and push them out of the way, then I'd probably seriously consider saving myself.
 
I would save myself by jumping out of the way.

Or pushing the fat guy.
 
You're on a bridge above a train track.
Underneath the Bridge are 5 People tied to the track. A Train is coming.
The only way to stop it is either by:
Jumping in the way of the Train, however you are quite thin, and jumping in the path of the train will only give a 33% chance of stopping it. There is however a fat man next to you, if you push him onto the track there is a 90% chance it will stop the train.

The train is empty and en-route to a scrap heap. There is no possibility of anyone dying except for thoose mentioned.

You can push the fat man off, who will definatley die, with a 90% chance of saving the other five and yourself.

Jump off yourself, with only a 25% chance of saving the 5 people, you will definatley die, and the fat man will definatley live.

Do nothing

What would you do?
Click to expand...

First, let me ask everyone here a question:

How is it, that the responsibility of these five lives rest in the hands of you and the fat man?

That responsibility ultimately belongs in the victims and the man who tied them to the track in the first place. Responsibility is a choice, and when you choose to burden yourself with someone else's responsibility, you bear the consequences and weight that they would not carry.

In short, if the person who tied them they're does not feel guilty about doing it, then you will bear the guilty. If the person who tied them they're was'nt angry when he did it, then you'll carry that emotion reguarding the crime.

The people who were tied to the track are not your chosen responsibility ... yet. And, you can still choose.

Yet we as humans feel compelled to make that which is not our own moral dillemma a part of ourselves. Moral degradation and self destruction are the results of such an action. Moral dilemma's must not always be solved through sacrifice (wether it be another person or yourself). Logically if you had time to save the victims by untieing them all, then sacrifice was pointless, was it not?

Logically, if you had time to untie them, you also had time to put something in the way of the train before it arrived and killed the victims. Perhaps that, over the fat man, would be more worthwhile then wasting lives that don't belong to you.

Let's face it. Success and failure might be dictated by percentages, ratios, and odds, but they're also dictated by logic and are defined by interpretation.

An Example:
One man might view success as saving those five lives by murdering someone else. Another man might view success as having saved himself and the fat man. Failure might be to some, letting these five people die. Failure might be to others, sacrificing everything to save these lives but inevitabely, despite percentages, ratios, and odds, accomplishing nothing more then utter and complete failure.

Should you suffer the consequences of failure for helping people whose cause you don't even know or fully grasp? They're circumstances, though sad, are inevitabley what they are. We cannot change them without destroying something, or ourselves in the process. But why destroy anything for that matter?

Why just "do" what the author states is our only option? The strong improvise.

The sad thing about the "weak" is that they feel compelled to make someone else's problems they're own. This is so they appear to be more socially acceptable or dependable as human beings. This is also how they feel they can make a belonging amungst peers. This is how they make themselves feel strong. But instead, they drain they're own strength.

The weak are the type of people who in this case, feel guilty for whats not they'res to feel guilty about. The weak are the type of people who feel an intense moral wrong, but choose less logical choices to solve they're problems or the ones that they feel they can take on. They often times lead themselves down the paths of emotional and mental destruction for taking on the responsibilities of someone else.

What should a man feel guilty for? You did'nt tie those people they're, someone else did. Your moral dilemma of saving someone or not saving anyone for that matter are yours. Just like those five tied to the train track. Just like the person who tied them up, the decision was theres and they actively participated in it.

Who tied them up? , should be the next question. Waaaassss it the fat man? Or you? These were things not described, and should be things to consider as open possibilities given the irony of this situation. Is the person who tied them up watching you? Another question: Would helping them really change they're fate, or alter yours down the same path of destruction?

Maybe these five were tied up on the railroad tracks and left they're for helping others ... now when captured again, you'll join they're ranks? And who will save you? The fat man?

But what if saving these five people reigned no gratitude or recognition from them? What if these five people moved on to hating you, or, involving you in the situations that got themselves tied up on the track in the first place?

Perhaps you'll be alone next time at this moral dilemma when it rises again. Perhaps you'll be alone, and no one will be around to save you.

Have you thought about this? Maybe those five wanted to be tied and hit by the train? C'mon, ask yourselves some questions here. They're are other choices to this. Make. Them.

Thats the problem I also have with the options left for people. If, it was your moral choice, why not untie the people from the track? No time? At least your doing something that does'nt carry with it the moral dilemma of shoving the fat person on the track, or yourself for that matter.

Why not be a witness to the crime? There are other options then these, and I find it paticularly disturbing that our only options are sacrifice and not selflessness or selfishness.

To be honest, destroying myself is not a wise choice. This crime might need a witness. I'm not afraid to witness death. Death is inevitable.

Also, destroying someone else to save those people is also not a moral choice worth taking. What if someone destroyed you to save five other people you did'nt know needed saving?

Its a life, and you'd be just as guilty as those who tied those first five to the track to be killed later by the train, as you would by pushing someone else in the way of fate to die for something he does'nt even understand nor has consented too. The same applies to anyone else for that matter who'd shove you in place of themselves.

But this question is wise: Would you send someone else to do your bidding? Or yourself? Or would you do no bidding and let fate take its course?

In the end, a life is not worth sacrificing. Sacrifice, should be personal, and not wrought on with the chains of guilt.

What would I do? Keep me and the fat man safe. He might know about the person who tied those people up. If I had time, I might make a way to stop that train before it arrived, or at least, find a way to untie those individuals from the tracks.

Maybe if before death, and if it was coming quick, I could tell the people not to fear it and go in peace. That I would not forget them, and they're names would be long remembered.

Thats what I'd do.
 
My god man i've only just woken up and already your handing out essays D:
 
I tend to when I have enough time. Usually, I'm so rushed with replying and typing crap over various different forums I rarely get time to write out something well thought out here.
 
Where's the option for 'Who ****ed up the laws of physics?'
Surly the train would have stopped by the third person anyway :p
 
I would do nothing. I would more than likely just freeze up or something. But I would see if I could use another tactic to stop the train. As in throwing a spike down in the path of the train trying to de-rail it. Or throwing a knife down to the "victims" in hope they would be able to cut themselves free in time not to get crushed like a bug. There is no way I would push the fat guy though. I just could not do that.
 
Didn't read the thing but pushing the fat man sounds like a funny thing to do.
 
Why not try to save the people by getting them untied instead of a stupid sacrifice that will just end up gettin you (or fat man) killed and the 5 people.
 
madog said:
Why not try to save the people by getting them untied instead of a stupid sacrifice that will just end up gettin you (or fat man) killed and the 5 people.
Click to expand...

Or why not ignore this ridiculous situation considering it would be impossible for even an elephant to put a train to a stop.

Do you know how much momentum 20 tons of steel can have?
 
there was this exact situation in discover magazine. The reason you consider killing the fat man as unethical is because you are directley involved in his death.

Now consider this situation (which the magazine also stated)

You are on the train, five people are tied in front of you on the track. There is no hope of stopping the train but you have one other option, if you pull a lever on the train you have a 90% chance of turning on another track, where the fat man is tied. If you pull the lever, the fat man dies, if you dont, the other five die.

what do you do in this situation?

At this point the left hemisphere of the brain takes over and quantifies the situation, its five deaths versus one, and almost 100% of people will choose to kill the fat man. However, this problem is exactley the same as the other one with one crucial difference. You are pulling a lever and the train is doing the killing, rather than directley pushing the man into the train.

The reason for this is evolutionary. Our brains have evolved to tell us killing someone with our bare hands is wrong, but we haven't yet gotten the ethical tract in our mind to deal with killing someone indirectley via a machine, and this is where our logic comes in.

This is prescisely why it is easier for someone emotionally to shoot someone than to stab them.
 
In that situation the obvious situation is to turn to the other track...

But still, those are some stupid situations...

The reason for this is evolutionary. Our brains have evolved to tell us killing someone with our bare hands is wrong, but we haven't yet gotten the ethical tract in our mind to deal with killing someone indirectley via a machine, and this is where our logic comes in.

This is prescisely why it is easier for someone emotionally to shoot someone than to stab them.
Click to expand...

That's not true at all I don't think. The emotional trauma that comes from stabbing vs shooting is based on the exertion required to keep the person down. Rather than just a pull of a trigger.

And the train thing... nothing to do with the mechanical nature of the train. It has to do with there only being two choices. One choice will happen automatically, unless you choose the other. Doing nothing won't change that first outcome. The situation is different than the pushing the fat guy one.

EDIT: By the way, where you at from Texas? I'm in northern Dallas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lizardizzle
  • Poll
A proposition: ValveTime Half-Life 1 co-op event
Replies
5
Views
1K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Lizardizzle
2019: The year of Half-Life SFX videos
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ennui
Ennui
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
-smash-
ARG or Easter Egg found inside Danger Zone update
Replies
2
Views
20K
BabyHeadCrab
BabyHeadCrab
B
Barking Dog Studios' work for Valve
Replies
0
Views
12K
Barnz
B
Back
Top