[ 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: 47 KB, 506x267, trolley.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388403 No.5388403[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Finally solved the trolley problem.

Using this concept called cost of opportunity, the cost for pulling the lever is one person, but the cost for not pulling is always greater than one, lets call it x. Since x > 1, the damage for not pulling is always greater and you should pull the lever.

>> No.5388414

>>5388403
>implying all human lives are equal

What if those 4 dudes were terminally ill and would die within days anyway while the 1 guy was a 10 year old who would cure cancer?

>> No.5388417

Whose blood is redder?

>> No.5388421

>>5388414


No. that's not the way it's supposed to work.

>> No.5388426

CongratUtilitarianism, dipshit

>> No.5388432

>>5388421
says who? Ok, how about instead of terminally ill, they were all Elliot Rodgers? Miserable idiots who planned to commit murder

>> No.5388442

>>5388432

You didn't understand the problem. You need to consider all the people are equal.

>> No.5388449

>>5388442
>You need to consider all the people are equal.
That's the fucking problem with this philosophical question. The reason why we have 200+ reply threads on this subject is because we're not willing to accept that premise. You colossal faggot.

>> No.5388454

>>5388403
This relies on the false premise of life being a good thing

>> No.5388456

>>5388442
But they're not.

>> No.5388458

>>5388442
Thats just not true though

>> No.5388464

Why woud you prefer saving one person when you can save four of this hell that is life? You're a horrible person, OP.

>> No.5388466
File: 72 KB, 1041x397, 1408433034128.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388466

>>5388432
>murder is bad

babby's first ethics

>> No.5388479

>>5388466
that's efilism, dates back to the greeks

delete that image

>> No.5388482

Wrong. You should pull the lever and let the train kill only one, so you have another 5 to have play. Pick one and show hell to him then see the other 4 pieces of shit begging to not have the same destiny, say you will free em all, wait the starting running and blow their heads dual wielding magnums.

>> No.5388485

>>5388414
Then you should kill the kid that cures cancer. Think about all the murderers and terrorists and rapists that would be cured only so that they can wreak havoc on the world.

>> No.5388494

>>5388442
the value of sum of five equal individuals is still greater than value of the sum of one individual who's of the same equal status. however you look at it, five will always be greater than one. my only uneasiness would be that the lever-puller, also being of equal value to the other six, doesn't have the superiority to merit occupying the position in which it's his decision who does or doesn't die. but unless the trolley can be stopped (if somebody must die) then the position of the lever-puller is irrelevant and the object is solely to reduce the "tragedy" -- which would be to sacrifice the one to save the five

(by the bye, if they're all equal, it's easier to accept the above solution, because it removes any possibility of "the one is more 'good' than the others" arguments)

>> No.5388503
File: 213 KB, 506x632, Multitrack Drifting.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388503

>>5388403

>> No.5388506

>>5388485
kek

>> No.5388508

>>5388414
so the issue (of morality, surely) is relative. we knew that already

>> No.5388511

>>5388442
Not if you're making the decision from a utilitarian standpoint. If you decide to pull the lever, it is because the value on one set of rails is less than the other, and not all human lives are equally valuable.

Which is why I don't pull the lever. Hippocratic oath, first do no harm.

>> No.5388514

The correct answer can never be known because we can't predict the future

/thread

>> No.5388515

>>5388514

You are wrong and avoid the problem

>> No.5388517

>>5388503
He doesn't look too happy about it, I think he wanted to kill the one but fucked up

>> No.5388518

>>5388479
efilism is liberal in the sense that it respects the individual's choice to reproduce and doesn't seek out to prevent it forcably, therefore it is inconsistent in condemning natalism.

>> No.5388527

>>5388511
fine if the trolley can be stopped, but there's no indication it can. it's going to hit either one. the question is which one to choose, not whether to act at all

burke quote, the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

yours isn't a solution

>> No.5388534

>>5388518
I guess. I actually logically agree with the immediate and total destruction of all life but my emotions and ego are staying my hand.

But yeah, the logic is flawless. I feel like I am being ripped apart.

>> No.5388542

>>5388515
Present an argument showing why I am wrong and then we'll talk

>> No.5388545

The correct answer is pull the lever. Austim makes you jerk about another solution.

>> No.5388548
File: 28 KB, 926x230, Screen Shot 2014-02-18 at 12.08.14 AM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388548

>>5388417
solved

>> No.5388561

>>5388403
>implying pulling the lever does anything

>> No.5388563

>>5388534
Calm down mate, it's not like it's possible to make it happen anyway.

On the other hand, it's not possible to prevent it either. Antinatalists and the like are on the right side of history, the extinction event will come regardless of what people will do. The quarrel is merely about getting it over with or delaying the inevitable.

>> No.5388571

>>5388561
>implying that would change anything on a moral level

>> No.5388578

>>5388527
Evil has already triumphed. It was evil that tied six men to the railroad tracks and dumped me into this position.
Right now the choice is between being complicit in evil or not.

>> No.5388585

>>5388442
compare

which is more black?
lebron james, or beau bokan?

which is more dogma?
jorge bergoglio or albert pike?

which has more charmastic manipulation?
stephen hawking or abraham lincoln?

>> No.5388587

what would kant do?

>> No.5388594

>>5388571
>implying i'm human

>> No.5388603
File: 98 KB, 1042x804, jesus christ.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388603

>> No.5388610

>>5388587
Kant would move the lever if he pictured himself as part of the bunch :^)

>> No.5388620

>>5388578
evil isn't rationed. it won't necessarily happen only once in a situation. by not acting, you're dooming at least one person to die, just like the person(s) who tied the men to the tracks in the first place did. so either way, whether you abstain or not, you're involved. the question then is which of the two - abstaining or acting - is the greater evil? abstaining is, i think. so you act to reduce the evil committed by those who created the situation

>> No.5388621

>>5388603
this is why
>>5388514

is the only correct response

>> No.5388738
File: 40 KB, 506x267, nogf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388738

>>5388403
>>5388403
>>5388403

>> No.5388742

>>5388738
What now, /lit/?

>> No.5388748

>>5388742
see
>>5388514

>> No.5388765

>>5388738
still save the five. the middle bit of the one will probably be alright. maybe a light wipe with a damp cloth will be needed but it'll still be salvageable

>> No.5388771

>>5388403
>anything greater than one is greater than one , and since one is less than greater than one, One should choose greater than one over one, on account of greater than one being greater than one

>> No.5388791

>>5388738
I save the woman. Her uterus makes her inherently more valuable than any men.

>> No.5388838
File: 40 KB, 506x267, bitchesandtrolleys.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388838

What happens next?

>> No.5388852

>>5388791
>being this fuckin' dumb

>> No.5388857

>>5388791
the uterus - and its eggs - has a purely elaborative role. the sperm is the real person-producer. although it's true that you need both to make a person, so in that sense, we're both wrong to say one is more important than the other and should really factor in when considering what action to take. but the sperm is superior. plus the men, if they're all fertile, have the greater child-bearing potential than the one woman, not to mention the fact that the woman will at some stage lose her fertility whereas the men will retain theirs indefinitely

>> No.5388861

>>5388857
see
>>5388454

>> No.5388877

>>5388861
the post you refer to seems to contain its own unsupportable claim.
>>5388454
>This relies on the false premise of life being a good thing
by saying it's a false premise that life is a good thing, it's suggested that the true premise is that life is a bad thing. i would say it's neutral. but i think that's irrelevant, as is the gender of the individuals and what their gender potentially means for the world. my post was merely a counter of what >>5388791 was claiming

>> No.5388882

>>5388877
there's nothing of compensatory value for even the slightest bit of suffering, let alone the gargantuan amount experienced by sentient beings at any given moment in time

>> No.5388885

so huh

how about brakes

>> No.5388886

>>5388885
filtered

>> No.5388888

>>5388882
so?

>> No.5388894

>>5388888
so kill yourself and everyone you know

>> No.5388897
File: 41 KB, 506x267, bitchesandtrolleys2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388897

>>5388838
LEVEL UP

>> No.5388899

>>5388888
Such a shitty get

>> No.5388901

>>5388852
>using this much ad hominem

>> No.5388902

>>5388901
>le irony face

>> No.5388908

>>5388838
The woman doesn't pull the lever because women can't perform basic ethical arithmetic.

>> No.5388916

>>5388857
So her rarity increases, and so does her value. There's only so many childs a woman can give birth to. A man can reproduce throughto his entire life.
Proportionally, a woman's eggs are more valuable than men's sperm. There will always be more sperm, but only so much eggs, as in the quantity curve is more steep.

>> No.5388917
File: 29 KB, 506x267, what do.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388917

A more interesting question.

>> No.5388919
File: 43 KB, 506x267, bonusstage.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5388919

>>5388908
BONUS STAGE

>> No.5388921

>>5388917
>implying women value men in the same way men value life
Nah nigga, nah

>> No.5388926

>>5388921
>implying there are any 'men' who value life
>implying willingly perpetuating pointless suffering doesn't make you dog shit

lel

>> No.5388937

>>5388919
The lever doesn't get pulled because a woman is still operating the lever.

>> No.5388939

>>5388917
A man would let the other men die, as history have proven. Even if its merely to increase his perceived value. A woman would pull the lever, since they are more emotional, peace-seekers moral people. Not to say men are amoral, it's just women have more moral and sense of ethics and integrity than men. Women value life more, since we are the main source of life.
She would save the men, even if the men would not save her and even though the men would not save her

>> No.5388986

>>5388916
firstly, that's not what the poster i replied to seemed to be suggesting. their claim seemed to be only that because a woman gives birth, her value is greater, whereas it only actually means that she herself can be responsible for the birth of, say, three children, compared to the fifteen children that the men could be responsible for (if they are all equal and produce three each)

secondly, your post isn't very clear

>so her rarity increases, and so does her value
her rarity? because she's outnumbered one to five? that matters?

>proportionally, a woman's eggs are more valuable than men's sperm
because there's more sperm than eggs? because the eggs are few, they're precious? if the question here is about child-bearing, the number of sperm makes them more important. if there's too few eggs to make many persons, so what? we have the sperm to compensate. for every one egg we lose, we have many sperm in their place

so i think you're looking at it backwards. you think that because the eggs are rarer, they should be saved, in the way an old building or book should be saved. nature isn't sentimental. as far as nature is concerned, the more important thing is that which is the stronger, promising and numerous. saving the men, and their little nut-tadpoles, will have a greater importance for mankind

>> No.5389005

To do nothing is the cleanest option.

>> No.5389021
File: 582 KB, 1048x828, f4d86c4fe69c17e223b8efbecd4b6e9df0ec4e5e.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5389021

it's a pity that nazis used jews in their death camps for some half-assed medical experiments which lost their significance ages ago instead of actually important moral experiments like this trolley problem

>>5388939
i believe some rare men can elevate themselves and value life almost as high as women do

>> No.5389065

>>5388986
And how the fuck is that abundant sperm going to make babies without the rarer eggs, it seems you struggle with understanding human reproduction

>> No.5389074

>>5389065
eggs aren't rare. i don't know whether you've noticed but there's slightly more than 6 people in the world, and of the existing people, roughly half are female

>> No.5389202

>>5389074
>there's slightly more than 6 people in the world

>> No.5389229

>>5389202
one or two more

>> No.5389418
File: 33 KB, 506x267, train_problem2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5389418

I am curious, will humans really become able to surpass their limits in extreme situations?

>> No.5389499
File: 233 KB, 1798x848, fags and an absurdist.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5389499

What do?

>> No.5389501

>>5389499
Pull the lever

>> No.5389504

>>5389418
>become the train

>> No.5389510

>>5388917
Pull the lever. Untie the financially successful one.
>>5388919
Kill them all, those bitches think they deserve tiaras.

>> No.5389522

>>5389501
Wittgenstein :(

>> No.5389653

>>5389499
Kill the feminist.

>> No.5389667
File: 68 KB, 738x485, tram suicide.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5389667

>> No.5389671

>>5389667
"I once read that the only philosophical question that matters, is whether or not to commit suicide... I guess that makes me a philosopher." - The Number 23. Easily the best movie of the 21st century so far.

>> No.5389835

>>5388403

1/2 lever, train shreks, people gets saved, and driver gets hailed for eternity in the fortunate islands.

>> No.5389846

>>5389499
I'm sorry Nietzsche but I know what I must do

>> No.5389875

>>5389499
i Don't understand ... all of those people are dead... what is the purpose of this?

>> No.5389879

>>5389875
Desecration

>> No.5389884

>>5389499
save the nitch at all cost, then break off the lever and beat the four people next to him to death with it

>> No.5389976

>>5389499
If only it was Heidegger instead of Kierkegaard, it would be even easier to do nothing.