[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 29 KB, 506x267, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4618151 No.4618151[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Well /lit/?

>> No.4618155

>>4618151
Fuck tram, sell lever, eat hostages.

>> No.4618169

>>4618151
Sell tram, fuck hostages, eat lever.

>> No.4618173

It's not whether you push the lever or leave it alone that matters; it's HOW you push the lever or leave it alone that matters.
If you push the lever just because you have a psychopathic desire to involve yourself in a slaughter then your pushing the lever is not good, even if it results in less deaths.

Here's the proper response to the situation:

>pray to God that the train comes to a halt and kills nobody

>> No.4618175

>>4618173
>>pray to God that the train comes to a halt and kills nobody
How does that fuck a tram you dumb cunt?

>> No.4618181

>>4618173
The proper response is to walk away, go home, and eat a sandwich.

>> No.4618191

Actually, the answer depends totally on the amount of knowledge the lever-controller has.
If the man on the top track is the Head of State and the men on the bottom track are random plebs then you could argue that it's his duty to State to allow the plebs to be killed. It all depends on how you formulate responsibility:
Is Country > Family, or is Family > Country? If responsibility to family is greater than responsibility to country then you could argue that it's better to let the five men die than kill a family member.
If the lever-controller has no knowledge about them other than there being "one man on the top track" and "five men on the bottom track", nothing else about the identity of the men being known, then he ought to just pray.

It reminds me of something Socrates says somewhere, viz. that it's odd for a skipper who has just transported a man from Greece to Italy to collect his payment as though he had just rendered the man a service, when in fact he has no real idea whether or not he benefited the man or whether it would have been better for him to remain in Greece. Socrates also says on his deathbed that he's not too bothered about dying because he really doesn't know whether or not it's better to be alive than to be dead. Same thing here; you are operating under complete ignorance. The only way you are going to know for sure if it's better to pull the lever or to leave it alone is if God reveals the answer to you.

>> No.4618199

>>4618191
Furthermore, this is the problem with Utilitarian ethics in general; it's a flaw that Nietzsche points out, viz. that you can't calculate the consequences of an act but for a few steps. Yes, you can imagine that if five men die that will mean five upset families, whereas if one man dies that means only one upset family; however, if the one man is involved in a chain of events that leads to a cure for a disease that would kill a thousand men, then that would mean that the survival of the one man is necessary to prevent the upsetting of a thousand families. See, you can't calculate into the future as far as you think.
A father doesn't know for certain whether or not it's better for him to go to work today than to not. On the one hand, he needs to go to work to look after his family; however, if there is going to be a fire at work today it would be much better for his family if he decided not to go to work --- that was the case on September 11th, 2001, for the families who had relatives working in either one of the Towers.

Tbh, you need a revelation from God to even be sure that your simplest acts are morally good. St. Paul even says that if you don't have Faith you don't even have a proper right to eat, lol. This is a logically/morally consistent statement to make, because unless omniscient God reveals to you that your manner of life is good you can never know whether or not you're brining about an enormous evil.

>> No.4618203

>>4618173
I retract the statement about praying so that nobody is killed; the proper prayer to make is, "Thy will be done". You can't know whether or not God would prefer if men died that day. For all you know the death of the five men on the bottom track would prevent an even greater evil from taking place.

>> No.4618207

the first thread was great, let's not run this into the ground trying to recapture the magic.

>> No.4618210

>>4618199
>St. Paul even says that if you don't have Faith you don't even have a proper right to eat, lol. This is a logically/morally consistent statement to make, because unless omniscient God reveals to you that your manner of life is good you can never know whether or not you're brining about an enormous evil.

People eat so that they can live, but why do they presume that their living is better than their dying? For all they know it would be much better for them if they died.
This is the whole point of Socratic Ignorance. You can't kill yourself either because that would presume that you know for certain that it would be better to die, which you do not know for certain. The only way knowledge can be certain is if it comes by Divine Revelation (which is why Socrates wanted his daimon to speak to him).

>> No.4618216
File: 79 KB, 1024x390, lit and the trolley problem.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4618216

>>4618151
Oh no, what the fuck did I do OP?

>> No.4618224

ignore it.

only a retarded ethicist would think I was was culpable.

There so many questions about the lever and what it does plus the fact that I never caused the accident in the first place....

>> No.4618228

who's to say that they aren't there for a good reason?
maybe they're all evil people being justly punished

i simply don't have the necessary information to stick my nose in and interfere. i'd be like that asshole who runs onto a film set and starts trying to beat up the actor playing the bad guy

>> No.4618231

>>4618224
I think these are the premises of the scenario:

>the lever switches the track; you have the ability to pull it or to leave it
>if you pull it the one man on the top track dies; no more, no less.
>if you leave it the five men on the bottom track die; no more, no less.

Of course, like I've said, you don't really know if the killing of the one man instead of the five would lead to a thousand deaths; we can't see the chain of causality but for a few links coming from the near past and into the near future.
If you're absolutely assured that only the one man would die if you pulled the lever, and only the five men would die if you left it alone; you still would not have enough knowledge to make a decision, because you don't know the rest of the lives that the one man or the five men would live, and you wouldn't be able to weigh up the good in their lives. If you were absolutely sure that it would be good for the one man to die and absolutely sure that it would be evil for the five men to die, then you ought to pull the lever; but how would you ever have that knowledge except by Divine Revelation? It would take EXTRAORDINARY insight into the future and EXTRAORDINARY judgement on right & wrong, good & evil, in order to be absolutely assured of that.

>> No.4618237

One for all and all for one; doesn't matter at all.

>> No.4618239

I walk by like nothing happened. I'm neither qualified nor authorized to operate the switch and I'm too apathetic to consider the implications of my actions.

>> No.4618241

>>4618203
That sounds rather dangerous. Why do anything to prevent bad things if there's a possibility that it's God's will? Why have doctors or medicine if it's possible that God wills that the sick should die?

>> No.4618243

>>4618173
>>pray to God that the train comes to a halt and kills nobody
. . . after pulling the lever, right?

>> No.4618246

>>4618241
>Why do anything to prevent bad things if there's a possibility that it's God's will? Why have doctors or medicine if it's possible that God wills that the sick should die?

We depend upon Divine Revelation for that; the revelation of the Scriptures and the continued revelation of the Catholic Church.

>O my God, I firmly believe that you are one God in three divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe that your divine Son became man and died for our sins, and that he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe these and all the truths which the holy catholic Church teaches, because in revealing them you can neither deceive nor be deceived.

God has revealed to us that we ought to love one and other and aid the poor. There's also this revelation that God gave to Adam & Eve and is in Genesis:

>And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.

You're right though, it is consistent with what I've been saying that we can't know for sure that it's best to help humanity. For all you know humanity is a great evil; that is the contention of the anti-natalists who preach that it's evil to give birth because it continues the human race, which is an evil.

>> No.4618247

/phil/

>> No.4618248

Here's a maxim for you.
Whether you get your way or not, God always gets His way. So, it's best for you to want whatever it is God wants, because if you want what God wants then you always get your own way.

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done; on earth as it is in heaven.

>> No.4618250

Don't touch the lever; it will release mustard gas.

>> No.4618253

>>4618199
>if the one man is involved in a chain of events that leads to a cure for a disease that would kill a thousand men
Simple probability tells you that that man would more likely be found among the five, given no other information about the men. What if each of the five men develop cures for diseases that kill thousands of men? What then?

>> No.4618257

If I were to step in front of the speeding train, thus allowing myself to be killed along with the five men, would it solve the philosophical conundrum?

>> No.4618259

>>4618228
Well, it's rather difficult to imagine vigilante justice, especially carried out so cartoonishly, being a just punishment in modern society. But you do raise a good point that it's important to consider all the information available, including social customs and attitudes.

>> No.4618261

>>4618246
Also, there is a sense in which our own nature reveals to us God's will.
We have a strong desire to live, which is evidence of God wanting us to live; because God would not have created us with such a powerful imperative otherwise. God also gave us a strong inclination to love our parents, which shows that he intends us to love them. St. Paul says that those who do not believe in God are without excuse because God's existence is evident from nature, and one can arrive at knowledge of God through the contemplation of nature. This reasoning from nature is where most people get their knowledge of good & evil; they see the misery associated with death and so reason that life is better than death.
However, human nature has been corrupted by Original Sin and so we often desire what is evil; there is plenty examples of men desiring what is evil (providing you have an idea of what good & evil are).
St. Paul also says that it is evil to act against our consciences. If our conscience tells us to do something then it is good for us to do it than to sear our consciences by failing to do what we think we ought to do.

The problem is certainty. You can't be sure unless you rely on an Authority that can guarantee your knowledge. People today are fond of using Reason as that authority, but mere human reason often errs.

>> No.4618263

>>4618248
If God always get his way, then my pulling the lever or not has no bearing on whether he gets his way. Therefore now I may make the choice independent from considering God's way, because it will happen no matter what. Then I pull the lever, because God had always intended me to.

>> No.4618266

>>4618257
Well, that's a suicidal man's way of resolving all the conundrums in his life, yes. Congratulations.

>> No.4618271

This is why philosophy is gay. What the fuck are you even trying to solve?

>> No.4618278

>>4618271
It's just like one of those personality tests. Only this one is figuring out if your morality is rule-based or consequence-based.

>> No.4618284
File: 213 KB, 506x632, 1393201003749.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4618284

>> No.4618286
File: 109 KB, 685x600, 1384455574994.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4618286

>>4618151
What if the lever is already set to take the high road? When you push it it would then carry on and kill all 5 of the others.

>> No.4618287

>>4618284
Can you imagine if shit from fiction happened all the time in real life? If these crazy one-in-a-million asspulls that show up at the last second and save everyone's ass leading to a happy ending for all just was the norm in our universe? Damn, if I were the author I'd do that.

>> No.4618288

what if
youre the tracks

>> No.4618291
File: 43 KB, 409x320, Railway_turnout_-_Oulu_Finland.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4618291

>>4618286
There's usually a sign. If there's no sign you can check the track itself.

>> No.4618294

>>4618286
>>4618291
And I mean from the diagram you can see that the track is aligned with the upper road.

>> No.4618299

>>4618294
oh shit

this changes the dilemma considerably

>> No.4618304

>>4618151
Let the tram hit the 5, then go stomp on the other guys head until he is dead, then take off your shirt and wrap it around your carotid artery, wait till you slip into the black and then from there into a deeper kind. congratulations, you have minimised suffering

>> No.4618305

>>4618294
>>4618299
Well, actually, there should be a gap in the path that the train would head. There isn't any, meaning that both paths are closed and the train might derail in between them

>> No.4618306

>>4618304
go away anti-natalist

>> No.4618309

>>4618304
Why not loot all their wallets, purchase a gun, and shoot up a mall, saving the last bullet for yourself?

>> No.4618312

>>4618191
>>4618199
>St. Paul even says that if you don't have Faith you don't even have a proper right to eat
are you referring to Romans 14, or some other passage?

>Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

Paul also writes: "You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace." It doesn't require extraordinary revelation.

>> No.4618314

>>4618309
Why not invent the atomic bomb and ensure its immediate application?

>> No.4618317

>>4618314
Why not genetically modify the flu to be 90% fatal?

>> No.4618318

>>4618309
I was providing the answer for this situation specifically, considering all the aspects involved. Anything outside of that scenario is irrelevant to the topic at hand

>> No.4618321

>>4618317
Why not genetically modify the flu to be 100% fatal?

>> No.4618324

>>4618309
>>4618314
>>4618317
>>4618321
why not stop reproducing? work in tandem to put an end to this cosmic horror show.

>> No.4618325

>>4618321
Because it would be more difficult to transmit.

I guess if it were dormant for a long period of time, then suddenly killed everyone 100% would work. Yeah, good idea actually.

>> No.4618327

>>4618324
Because that only works for the person who decides to stop reproducing. You need a way to force everyone to stop reproducing.

>> No.4618329

>>4618327
That what I meant by work in tandem. All of humanity needs to overcome their programming and selfish desire to ascribe meaning to their own lives by producing more meat bags for the guillotine

>> No.4618330

>>4618329
Well, that would be ideal. But reality isn't so nice, so you need to enforce your vision through more physical methods.

>> No.4618359

>>4618312
Yes, I see that I must have arrived at a wrong notion somewhere. Apologies for that, for it seems as though when St. Paul speaks of eating is talking about the conscience of those who the old Jewish traditions told not to eat certain meats.
However, he does say:
>Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatsoever else you do, do all to the glory of God.
In 1 Corinthians.

Sorry again, this reminds me that I shouldn't be so quick to parade my ignorance.

>> No.4618541

>>4618359
It's a good point to make, since it emphasizes that food MUST be eaten in glory to God. If one is given food consecrated to some other deity, it isn't enough to deny the consecration through disbelief; it must be transformed by faith. But I'm not sure how I could justify any action by faith in the trolley problem.

>> No.4618556

>>4618248

*tips mitre*

>> No.4618561

>>4618151
u pull teh lever halfway u dimwit so the tram derail and doesn't kill nobody

>> No.4618649

After ensuring the train was headed toward the one man I would attempt to run to him or her and cut them free. If I couldn't save them I would die with them so they didn't have to be alone.

>> No.4618746

>>4618151
Simple as don't touch anything then kill the other guy with your bare hands, I don't see how is it hard to figure out

>> No.4618769
File: 9 KB, 200x155, 1370080637577.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4618769

>>4618284
>>4618216

>> No.4618775

>>4618746
What a hilarious edge!

>> No.4618795

>>4618775
Thank you 4chan

>> No.4618805

Save whichever sides has cute girls. If they're all cute girls then I switch the lever. If the only cute girl is the one that is alone then don't switch the lever.

>> No.4618809

>>4618805
This.

>> No.4618815

>>4618805
What if there are five ok girls (who obviously are gonna fuck with you since you save them) and one incredibly beautiful girl on the other side (with is harder to fuck even if you save her ass)

>> No.4618816

>>4618815
That's a fucking difficult question. It depends, how ok are they?

>> No.4618820

>>4618816
Like the most ugly girl you fucked (assuming you respect yourself)

>> No.4618834

>>4618815
Always pick the most beautiful, you'll have no regrets then.
>>4618820
>girl you fucked
>anyone on 4chan
lel

>> No.4618838

>>4618834
But this /lit/, readers fuck

>> No.4618839

>>4618820
Uh, jeez... so there's five of them? And the girl is incredibly beautiful? Damn...I guess it depends how I'm feeling. Some ok girls look really nice some days. Some incredibly beautiful girls look even more incredible on others. I think it depends on how well I know the beautiful girl. If I feel like there is at least a chance, I'd pick her. Also, I think personalities may play a little role in this as well.

>> No.4618840

>>4618838
>nerds who stuff their faces with old dusty paper
>fuck
lel

>> No.4618845

>>4618834
Have you really never fucked a girl? Or is this just a joke.

>> No.4618857

>>4618840
Nerds who understand the human condition and know how a girl's brain works-it worked for me (not a lot but ya know, some)

>> No.4618858

>>4618845
I'm a kissless virgin. That's standard fare for anyone on 4chan, this is common knowledge normalfag.

>> No.4618862

>>4618845
You don't belong here.

>> No.4618865

>>4618858
Go to /fa/ and /fit/

>> No.4618870

Please explain to me why anyone would think it is moral to let five people die instead of having one die. I seriously do not comprehend how anyone who calls themselves "moral" could say that. Is it because, if they aren't actively taking a knife to someone's throat themselves, they think it's fine for people to die so they aren't inconvenienced with a tough decision?

>muh categorical imperatives

Kant a shit and you're a fucking imbecile. You do whatever gets the best result. The thoughts inside your tiny little skull are no where near as important as concrete, actual things. (Now you're going to argue from rhetoric that thoughts are physical things. No. They're a sequence of neurons firing an electrical signal and/or neurotransmitters.) I'm sure the five people you watched die will understand that you couldn't use the other person as a means to an end. I'm sure they'll have sympathy.

This is why no one puts a philosopher in any position of power where they actually need to do things and make decisions. "Oh, I couldn't feel like it today, choosing between unemployment and inflation presents an unanswered moral quandary. That's why I sat in my bathtub all day instead."

>> No.4618868

>>4618862
People should somehow advertise the fact that they're still a virgin on this board so that I know to never take them seriously.

>> No.4618872

>>4618868
>privileging sex over intellect
pleb to the max

>> No.4618874

>>4618865
Besides the normalshit boards

>> No.4618884

>>4618872
I privilege life experience over "intellect"

>> No.4618905

>>4618870
Man there are girls in the equation

>> No.4618958

>>4618884
Says the guy on /lit/

>> No.4618987

>>4618905

Who cares? None of 'em are gonna be sleeping with you.

>> No.4619593

>>4618649
With all the bait in this thread I'm kinda surprised no one took this piece but I'll bite.
>implying you could outrun a train
>implying you have the necessary amount of commitment required to die with someone to make them more comfortable
>implying it'd be worth while even if you did

>> No.4619614

Leave it as it is, do not get involved.
If you get involved then you are guilty also of the millions of people you are not dedicating to save in your free time.

>> No.4619632

What if the five guys were all black?

>> No.4619717

>>4618173

You sound like a lawyer.

I fucking hate you.

>> No.4619724

>derail the train
>kill the guy
>kill the five

>> No.4619734

>>4618173

Blow up the train, kill all the people and carve them up, build a cathedral of the bones and dance around in the ashes wearing their skins.

>> No.4619735
File: 176 KB, 1200x798, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4619735

>>4619724
YOU CANT JUST DERAIL THE TRAIN YOU FUCKING SPASTIK THATS THE WHOLE POINT GODDAMIT I WAS HOPING FOR SOME PROPER INTELLECTUAL DISCUSSION IN THIS THREAD BUT INSTEAD I FUCKING GOT YOU FUCKING DIE YOU STUPID FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT

>> No.4619750

>>4618151
This is fucking obvious. You hit the lever.

>> No.4619755

>>4619750
So there are more survivors to sodomize?

>> No.4619757

>>4619735
there is no need to be upset
stop the philosophizing
stop the rationalizing
stop looking for something better
art is violence
and violence is art

>> No.4619764

>>4619735
>implying we don't have this thread every week
>implying anyone gives a a shit anymore

>> No.4619776

>>4619757
>>4619764
*whispers* it's a joke

>> No.4619780
File: 86 KB, 1000x760, n50aa7ffe8dd2b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4619780

>>4619776
ur a joke m8

>> No.4619825

>>4619755
>implying you can't sodomize a dead guy

>> No.4619874

>>4619780
no u ;)

>> No.4619882
File: 49 KB, 600x450, 1393719440604.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4619882

>>4619776
You're a funny guy.

>> No.4619911

you stand in front of the train and frown concernedly as you die

>> No.4620029

>>4618884
>2014
>Hedonism

kellek

>> No.4620140

>>4618321
Why not genetically modify yourself to be 100% flu?

>> No.4620155

>>4619717
Not really. He's just acknowledging that motive plays a role in the morality of any action.

>> No.4620407

>>4618958
I love /lit/ you guys are great

>> No.4620874

>>4620407
I love YOU anon

>> No.4620935

>Do nothing
>Still save at least one person

>> No.4620960

>>4618870
What if there's 5 young Hitler vs your dad?

>> No.4620992

What is the moral dilemma here?
Is it that to pull the lever to kill only one person as opposed to several people is, in a way, singling out the one person who has to die as a sacrifice and as potentially someone whose life is less valuable?
It's circumstance, nigga, pull the lever and let the one person die. It's an unfortunate loss but it's not something that could be prevented.

A much more compelling dilemma is that you are locked in a tram moving along on a one-way track; there are several people that will be killed on the track, and the only way to stop the tram is to pull a lever inside, which blows the fucking thing up, and you'll die inside it. Would you kill yourself to spare the lives of several people?

>> No.4621103
File: 24 KB, 330x220, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4621103

>>4618151
Wait guys, I got it! Just ask the fucking guy if he wants to sacrifice himself and do what he says

tfw you achieve /lit/

>> No.4621178

>>4618199
Determining whether something was morally "good" or not based on a consequentialist model is stupid as fuck. If I walk into the street and shoot a gun into a crowd to try and kill anyone I can, I'm being an asshole, even if I don't hit anyone. Even if they all flee because of it and then an unrelated terrorist cell bombs the now-empty street, I was still trying to kill people for no reason. Likewise, if I walk into the street and step on a buried mine that then destroys my whole block, I wasn't being immoral by leaving my house.

>> No.4621426

Do fucking nothing. It's not your fault, whatever happens.

>> No.4621449

>>4618151
Pick the four guys' pockets, let them die, share loot with other guy to keep things hush hush. But only after peeing on him at least a little.

>> No.4621466

There's a chance any of those guys could be the next Hitler.

By taking the low track, you kill more people, thus increasing your chances of killing the next Hitler. It's the only decent thing to do.

>> No.4621471

>>4621449
i like your steez
+1

>> No.4621473

>>4620992
I'd kill myself even if there were no people on the tracks. Life is abhorrent.

>> No.4621479

>>4621426
Doing nothing is still an action.

>> No.4621500

>>4621466
>There's a chance any of those guys could be the next Gandhi.
>By taking the low track, you kill more people, thus increasing your chances of killing the next Gandhi. It's the only stupid thing to do.

>> No.4621539

>>4621500
>taking that response seriously

>> No.4621555

>>4621466
>implying hitler was a bad guy

>> No.4621578
File: 5 KB, 125x125, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4621578

>>4621103
Nobody cares

>> No.4621692

>>4621578
hey look its the 17th millenium autism woman

>> No.4621863
File: 107 KB, 243x241, 2013-01-29_2123.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4621863

>>4618284
Fucking beautiful.

>> No.4621865
File: 14 KB, 172x182, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4621865

>>4621692
You mean lucie? Yeah I can see the resemblance now

>> No.4621905

>>4621555
>implying he was a guy
fuck off cis scum

>> No.4621997

>>4621905
>implying he was
Eat your bowl of Jewish propaganda

>> No.4622030

>>4620960
>Implying Hitler didn't give Germany a 100% employment rate
>Implying WW2 wasn't going to happen if Hitler didn't start it
>Implying the Jews don't consider non-Jews subhuman
You are so blue pilled it hurts.

>> No.4622032

>>4622030
>implying this isn't actually true
>implying Germany had a choice with the USSR next door, France trying to dismantle it, and Eastern Europe going apeshit with irredentism

>> No.4622035

>>4618561
>tram derail
>doesn't kill nobody

>>4618561
>doesn't
>nobody

>> No.4622040

>>4622032
>implying you would choose your dad

>> No.4622050

>>4622035
You replied to the same intentionally bad post twice taking it seriously.

>> No.4622061

>>4622035
You replied to the same intentionally bad post twice taking it seriously

>> No.4622064
File: 490 KB, 449x401, laughing girls.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4622064

>>4618173
>pray

>> No.4622066

I unsheathe my katana and cut the train into a million pieces as easily as a hot knife cuts through butter.

>> No.4622068

I pull the lever then quickly move the one guy on the track out of the way before the train hits him.

>> No.4622076

>>4622050
>>4622061
>You replied to the same intentionally bad post twice taking it seriously

>> No.4622079
File: 135 KB, 600x800, 1358572011233.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4622079

>*spot train*
>W-what? OH NO! All those innocent people...
>I...I can't let this HAPPEN!! UuuuuuRRRGGHHH
>*unsheathes 20 katanas in the air*
>*katanas glow with purple flames*
>I...I can feel the power!!
>*grabs one katana, the other nineteen circle in a ring, blades pointed at the train*
>And now?! THE FINAL ATTACK! TaaaaaAAAAAKE THIIIIIIISSSS!!
>*purple lasers trail the swords as the fly into the the front side of the the tram, impaling it.*
>*I'm still holding the last sword*
>*I hold onto it with one hand*
>*colors invert*
>*point at it with one hand*
>And now, you too, will embrace the pain of 2,000 nights!
>*Beam shoots from the sword*
>*engulfs the tram for a 10 seconds*
>*nothing left except a smoldering crate*
>*turns around and lets cape wave with the twirl*
>*walk away*
>*swing head back and smirk*
>Heh...nothing personal, kid.

>> No.4622101
File: 9 KB, 242x250, 1359550319947.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4622101

>>4622079

>> No.4622117
File: 1.65 MB, 200x150, 1393783357665.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4622117

>>4622079
Best post in this entire thread.

>> No.4623436

>>4621178
But your actions as an asshole saved the lives of many people. Even if your intentions weren't virtuous or noble, your shootings resulted in a positive outcome. You can claim your intentions were malevolent but at the end of the day, your intentions have no bearing on the effects of your actions on reality. Regardless of whether you were trying to shoot people or were just scaring them off to protect them from the terrorist cell, the outcome is exactly the same.

>> No.4623451

>>4622079
is that a fucking moomin magical girl

>> No.4623938

>>4623436
A person with good intent will almost certainly do more good than bad over time, and vice-versa.

Virtue is all that matters.

>> No.4623947

>>4622079
Jesus fucking Christ. This may be my actual favorite fucking response to this dilemma.

And isn't that the mouse chick from FFIX?

>> No.4623962
File: 191 KB, 500x667, ahaha.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4623962

>>4622079
/thread

>> No.4624679

>>4623938
Yeah like Lenine

>> No.4624684

>>4624679
Why is my name deleted?! What is happening? I've never wrote that

>> No.4624723

Utilitarianism dictates you pull the lever, barring bullshit cop-outs like claims of sudden nihilism.

>> No.4624733

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUsGDVOCLVQ

Yup... found it.

>> No.4624735

>>4624723
>being responsible for a man's death
>moral
i don't think you understand this game

>> No.4624754

>>4622079
>Not writing "personal" as "personnel"

9.9/10

>> No.4624776

>>4624735
>letting several people die when all you had to do was pull a lever to save them
>moral

>> No.4624782

>>4622079
now i have a sudden urge to go watch advent children

>> No.4625141

>>4622064
>not getting an obvious joke just to satisfy a subconscious desire to make yourself seem superior on an internet message board through your atheism as if most people here weren't atheists in the first place

>> No.4625272

>>4618216
Analysis paralysis I can not choose.

>> No.4625275

Looks like he has to die.

>> No.4625281

Who am I to interfere with the conflict of interest between unknown villains?

>> No.4625303

>>4618151

Run over the 1 guy.
I have absolutely no problem with "involving myself" in this train incident.
Odds are I will have public opinion on my side for adverting the death of five people.

>> No.4625388

>>4618284
The only acceptable answer.
That way you're not valuing one life over another or thinking about whether the one man is a scientist with a cure for cancer, or whether the other group are actually 5 beautiful women, or whether the action you are doing is applicable as a universal law.
Everyone dies, but everyone also dies as equals, and what could be more moral than that?

>> No.4625406

This thread will never die

>> No.4625425

>>4625406
:(

>> No.4625437

>>4625406
Well, I suppose it gives the people tied to the tracks a little longer to live

>> No.4625442

>>4625425
>implying your sad

>> No.4625446

>>4625437
They want to die already

>> No.4625454

>>4625442
My sad what?

>> No.4625461

>>4624684
your name isn't deleted it's right there

>> No.4625567
File: 461 KB, 500x360, 1391714909829.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4625567

>>4625388

>> No.4625619

>>4625454
You're sad face

>> No.4625623

>>4625461
How do you know my name?!

>> No.4625709

>>4625619
:(

>> No.4625719

>>4625709
You like skateboard?

>> No.4625751

>>4625623
Don't you recognise me Del?

>> No.4625756

I have only a passing interest in ethics and philosophy on the internet and have yet to take a class on either. With that disclaimer, this is my view:

By being in that situation, whether one is taking an active or passive role is irrelevant. Standing with a hand on the lever means one is given a choice, and pulling or leaving the lever are just as much a full choice one way as the other. You can either choose one death or choose five deaths. The fact that you have an active role in the death of the one does not matter, as due to the circumstances of the train you were forced to be provided with only those two options. The answer seems to clearly make the single death the preferable option.

The action of pulling the handle is nothing but a physical confirmation that one death is preferable to five. I fail to see how the fact that a physical action was not involved somehow makes the acting party less responsible for making that choice. Given the circumstance, there is only the choice, option A or B is chosen, and the way it is confirmed (through physical action or lack thereof) is irrelevant to the actual choice made.

Is there a fault with this line of thought? (Am I unclear in some way?)

>> No.4625783

>>4625751
No I'm right there

>> No.4625856

>>4625783
Where am I then?

>> No.4625911

>>4618173
i love you. first actual response and its the spot-on, exact true one.

>> No.4625929

>>4618261
agree with all of your posts so far, good stuff, keep em coming.

would you pull a lever at all? personally, my conscience would tell me to pull the one leading to less deaths, but still trust God to ultimately fix it if He so chooses, ie, halting it.

>> No.4626109

>>4624735
Option A: one person dies
Option B: five people die
It is easily within your capability to choose either objective

Clearly, anybody who chooses Option B is morally wrong, and is responsible for four needless deaths. Moreover, they are incredibly selfish, choosing to absolve themselves of blame and make themselves feel better rather than acting for the wider benefit. They put their own feelings above those four lives.

>> No.4626150

>>4626109
yeah but arent you minimalising suffering by killing more people think about the trauma they will endure knowing they were responsible for someone dying

>> No.4626169

>>4618231
even then, you can't judge the 1v5 by moral standards.
pull/dont pull, whichever makes it so the top track is chosen and hope it is halted naturally (as set up by God) or by divine intervention of Him actually messing with matter

>> No.4626186

>>4626109
hello bentham, no stop posting and go to sleep

>> No.4626206

>>4626109
>They put their own feelings above those four lives.
Or perhaps they have so great a sense of moral duty that they believe that these people will die because they were tied to the tracks by a lunatic, not because you didn't intervene.
Everyone is their own moral agent - if we end up cleaning up after every morally corrupt person then we're relinquishing all the power and, subsequently, all moral authority we may have had over them, allowing them to behave as they please.

>> No.4626212

>>4626150
>they were responsible

How could any sane person ascribe them responsibility?

>> No.4626226

>>4626212
well they fucked up by tying themselves to train tracks

i have thought htis through btw. this is a common ethical conundrum that is a microcosm of individuality and society as a whole. as i said, the group tied themselves to the train tracks after they tied the individual to a different path. the other individual must decide whether to kill the one or five. he will choose one and conform and submit to the grand directive of society.

>> No.4626234

>>4626206
>these people will die because they were tied to the tracks by a lunatic, not because you didn't intervene
They will die due to both (assuming you don't pull the lever). This is a matter of fact, not a moral stance or an opinion.

>if we end up cleaning up after every morally corrupt person then we're relinquishing all the power and, subsequently, all moral authority we may have had over them, allowing them to behave as they please
What exactly do you mean by this? We should just let bad people do bad things? What power over them are we losing by intervening? What do you mean by moral authority? Are you let letting them behave as they please by letting their situation run out as it would have without your intervention?

I can't help but feel this is a very simple situation, with a very simple and obvious answer, which has been needlessly over-complicated by people attempting to establish and follow systems of rules and rights instead of simply "do whatever maximizes happiness and minimizes suffering".

>> No.4626253

>>4625756
Someone respond to this, there's obviously something I'm missing

>> No.4626296

>>4626253
you're right, what you're missing is that this whole 'conundrum' is artificial and forced in the first place and therefore not worth discussion apart from the funny maymays

of course if you subscribe to the categorical imperative or doctrine of double effect et al, with none of their retarded conditions applied, you should obviously be picking the one that only kills one dude but who gives a shit, i'd kill those 5 assholes because it'd be cooler

>> No.4626327

tie your shoelaces together to your belt and shirt with your shoes at the end, swing it into the top part of the trolley, and pull the lever just as the trolley passes over while tugging on the belt so the train derails.

>> No.4626333

>>4626327
ok what if u just erased the people

would u be preventing their lives from being lost or did u just murder them

>> No.4626391

>>4618151
marry Hostages, Fuck Tram, kill lever.

>> No.4626396

>>4626391
>not fuck hostages, marry tram and kill lever

>> No.4626449

>>4624679
"Almost certainly" doesn't mean the same thing as "certainly." The "almost" is important.

And virtue is more than JUST good intent.

>> No.4626733

>>4618151
Not my problem. I'd end up in prison for manslaughter at the very least if I touched the lever, so fuck 'em.

Even if that weren't the case, I likely wouldn't intervene unless someone I knew was tied up on the tracks.

>> No.4627342

>>4618151
>tram
>doors on the back
>goes the other way
>you are being tricked

>> No.4627353
File: 105 KB, 303x380, 1390687101755.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4627353

>>4622079
I'm wiping away tears

>> No.4627377

>>4622035
>muh prescriptivism
>hey guys if u don't speak exactly like my grammar teacher who used to touch me in elementary school you're communicating WRONG WRONG WRONG

>> No.4627410
File: 86 KB, 900x970, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4627410

>>4627377
I like you

>> No.4627452
File: 206 KB, 1280x960, 1383726084833.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4627452

What novels touch on the following?
>raves
>sex/love
>femme fatale
>drugs
>shitty suburban culture

>> No.4627501
File: 3 KB, 123x125, 1392704342793.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4627501

>>4618173

>Lawyer.

>> No.4628106

>>4622079
Fucking hell

>> No.4628564

>>4627452
americna pie