A set of difficult decisions.

[kotorfan04]

So I just remembered these and since there are so many moral choice questions going around I have two for you.

1.) A train is out of control and barreling straight towards a bunch of people that are both blind and deaf, you are manning the track switch and you can divert the train onto another track but it will kill one person who happens to be crossing the tracks. What do you do?

2.) The same set up as before, but now the only way to stop the train is by putting a large object in its path and the only object that is sufficently heavy and is close enough to the tracks to be moved on time is a very large fat person taking a moment to tie his shoes. Do you shove the man onto the tracks to save the blind people or do you fail to take action?

(Sorry if there is weird grammar syntax, but I am kind of sick at the moment so my mind is muddled.)

 

[Neonbob]

That same question has been asked before.
And if you knew there were a wealth of these threads already in existence, why would you make another? Just add the question to one of the existing ones. These really don't do anything for discussion.

But I'd just sit back. In both scenarios.
[sup]Oh fine. I'd take the choice that only kills one person...but that death has to be spectacular to make up for the lack of gore. I want exploding limbs here![/sup]

 

[TriggerUnhappy]

Thread's been done before, but whatever. I'd just let the blind and deaf people die, it's their fault for being in front of the tracks in the first place. Yeah, it's kind of hard for them to tell there's a train coming, but I wouldn't kill some innocent bystander to save some people who fucked up.

 

[kotorfan04]

That same question has been asked before.
And if you knew there were a wealth of these threads already in existence, why would you make another? Just add the question to one of the existing ones. These really don't do anything for discussion.

But I'd just sit back. In both scenarios.
[sup]Oh fine. I'd take the choice that only kills one person...but that death has to be spectacular to make up for the lack of gore. I want exploding limbs here![/sup]

Well I didn't want to hijack someone else's thread that would be a corruption of its purpose, however I found the premise of these questions intriguing, so I wanted to see what the folks here at the Escapist would do.

I personally would divert in sit 1, and sacrifice fatty in sit 2.

 

[Radeonx]

I'd sit back. I don't want to be involved in a murder of any sort.

 

[Kriptonite]

In the first one, divert the train and yell to the person to get out of the way. I don't know about the other ones. How do you weigh lives against lives?

 

[Neonbob]

That same question has been asked before.
And if you knew there were a wealth of these threads already in existence, why would you make another? Just add the question to one of the existing ones. These really don't do anything for discussion.

But I'd just sit back. In both scenarios.
[sup]Oh fine. I'd take the choice that only kills one person...but that death has to be spectacular to make up for the lack of gore. I want exploding limbs here![/sup]

Well I didn't want to hijack someone else's thread that would be a corruption of its purpose, however I found the premise of these questions intriguing, so I wanted to see what the folks here at the Escapist would do.

I personally would divert in sit 1, and sacrifice fatty in sit 2.

I see.
Well, most of those other threads have been answered for the entire community within the first three posts, as there are only two real answers for the situation, and then one extraneous oddball.
Plus, I know one of the threads already had at least one additional problem added to it.

 

[UAProxy]

I'd let the impaired be run over. It sounds more appealing to let the one die for the sake of the many, but that's also considered murder and if a group of blind men are foolish enough to wander across a set of train tracks once what's to stop them from doing it again? In the end, refraining from action is the most logical choice.

 

[kotorfan04]

Also I wanted the information gained from this question to be in one section so I could analyze how people reacted in both situations and to see if they reacted differently in a situation that inadvertently resulted in dead (Sit 1) and a situation where you actively killed someone (Sit 2) So I suppose if you have any moral conundrums of a simillar sort you could add it here, but mostly I wanted this thread to be about analyzing how far the ends would justify the means, if that makes any sense.

 

[ElephantGuts]

1. Let the train smash into the group of blind and deaf people because they are blind and deaf and detrimental to society.

2. Push the fat person because if he's obese enough to stop a train then I'm doing him a favor.

 

[FallenJellyDoughnut]

I would let the second guy splatter then wait for another train to get the blind and deaf ones... I am definatly going to hell...

 

[Neonbob]

Also I wanted the information gained from this question to be in one section so I could analyze how people reacted in both situations and to see if they reacted differently in a situation that inadvertently resulted in dead (Sit 1) and a situation where you actively killed someone (Sit 2) So I suppose if you have any moral conundrums of a simillar sort you could add it here, but mostly I wanted this thread to be about analyzing how far the ends would justify the means, if that makes any sense.

Ah. Very well.
I shall not fault you for that.
[sup]I'll let someone else do it for me [/sup]

2. Push the fat person because if he's obese enough to stop a train then I'm doing him a favor.

Or:
2: Push the fat man in front of the train, because if he can stop it, then it's really not that big a train.

 

[Generator]

1. Let the train smash into the group of blind and deaf people because they are blind and deaf and detrimental to society.

2. Push the fat person because if he's obese enough to stop a train then I'm doing him a favor.

That's a good point; I was going to say walk the other way in both situations, but I guess if he's fat enough to stop a moving train, it really would be in his better interest to die.