in ethics—the Trolley Problem—than Judith Jarvis Thomson. Though the problem is originally due to Philippa Foot, Thomson showed how Foot’s simple solution. These slides are for an Introduction to Philosophy course at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC, Canada. They talk about. By Judith Jarvis Thomson, Published on 01/01/ Recommended Citation. Judith Jarvis Thomson, The Trolley Problem, 94 Yale L.J. (). Available at.
|Published (Last):||14 March 2015|
|PDF File Size:||14.74 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.54 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Retrieved 11 May Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. Unger claims that people therefore believe the man is not “fair game”, but says that this lack of involvement in the scenario cannot make a moral difference. A claim can be made that the difference between the two cases is that in the second, you intend someone’s death to save the five, and this is wrong, whereas, in the first, you have no such intention.
Retrieved from ” https: Are We Ready for Utilitarian Cars? The trolley dilemma allows us to think through the consequences of an action and consider whether its moral value is determined solely by its outcome.
This page was last edited on 27 Decemberat Real world dilemmas The trolley dilemma and its variations demonstrate that most people approve of some actions that cause harm, yet other actions with the same outcome are not considered permissible.
In other projects Wikimedia Commons. As before, a trolley is hurtling down a track towards five people. The former is active while the latter is passive.
Trolley problem – Wikipedia
ghomson Thompson and other philosophers have given us other variations on the trolley dilemma that are also scarily entertaining.
Variations Now consider now the second variation of this dilemma. In the distance, you spot a runaway trolley hurtling down the tracks towards five workers who cannot hear it coming. InJoshua Greene and colleagues published the results of the first significant empirical investigation of people’s responses to trolley problems.
Ina Facebook page under the name “Trolley Problem Memes” was recognised for its popularity on Facebook. In the case of the riots the mob have five hostages, so that in both examples the exchange is supposed to be one man’s life for the lives of five. Atkinson – – Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 8 2: Laura D’Olimpio does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from thhe article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In an urban legend that has existed since at least the mids, the decision is described as having been made in real life by a drawbridge keeper who was forced to choose between sacrificing a passenger train and his own four-year-old son.
Science Logic and Mathematics. Suppose that a judge or magistrate is faced with rioters demanding that a culprit be found for a certain crime and threatening otherwise to take their own bloody revenge on a particular section of the community. Killing, Letting Die, and Thomson.
Unger argues extensively against traditional non-utilitarian responses to trolley problems. Trolley problems have also been a topic of popular books. James Rachels – – In Lawrence C. Moral Dilemmas and Moral Rules.
Judith Jarvis Thomson, Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley Problem – PhilPapers
Basil Blackwell, originally appeared in the Oxford ReviewNumber 5, Imagine you are standing beside some tram tracks. The Monist 59 2: Republish our articles for free, online trolley in print, under Creative Commons license. Two each require one lung, another two each require a kidney and the fifth needs a heart. However, in this variant the secondary track later rejoins the main track, so diverting the trolley still leaves it on a track which leads to the five people.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
A healthy young traveler, just passing through the city the doctor works in, comes in for a routine checkup. If this is the case, then deciding to do nothing would be considered an immoral act if one values five lives more than one. If all the dilemmas above have the same consequence, yet most people would only be willing to throw the lever, but not push the fat man or kill the healthy patient, does that mean our moral intuitions are not always reliable, logical or consistent?
Inconsistent or are there other factors than consequences at play? Webarchive template wayback links Interlanguage link template link number Wikipedia articles needing clarification from February All articles with unsourced statements Articles with unsourced statements from February Spoken articles Articles with hAudio microformats.
Sign in to use this feature. One clear distinction is that in the first case, one does not intend harm towards anyone — harming the one is just a side effect of switching the trolley away from the five. Views Read Edit View history.
Joachim Asscher – – Bioethics 22 5: