Which path, /lit/?

[Anonymous No.4981805]

[Anonymous No.4981812]

Don't interfere. Don't multi-track drift.

[Anonymous No.4981815]

The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many.

[Anonymous No.4981818]

>>4981805
I'd leave the lever alone.

I'm too much of a faggot to be responsible for anyone's death.

[Anonymous No.4981825]

oh look it's this thread again

[Anonymous No.4981826]

Pull it halfway so the trolly becomes stuck in the crosspath

[Anonymous No.4981831]

Do nothing, because the trolly is going in reverse.

[Anonymous No.4981837]

THE ONLY HUMAN SOLUTION IS TO JUMP IN FRONT OF IT YOURSELF

[Anonymous No.4981839]

Give me one valid reason why five lives are worth more than one.

[Anonymous No.4981840]

>>4981815
That's a spook actually.

Stirner couldn't think himself out of a cereal box maze and had to rely on his vagina hormones to make decisions.

[Anonymous No.4981851]

>>4981839
They're worth five times the single one.

[Anonymous No.4981853]

>>4981826
But then you'd risk killing everyone in the trolley. Which would beg the question of how many people are in the trolley. From the picture, it doesn't really seem like a populated area and light rail is an unpopular enough mode of transportation (at least in the US). Yet judging purely from the picture, it doesn't really seem like anyone is in the trolley.

If this is true, then I don't see how anyone could justify not pulling the level halfway.

[Anonymous No.4981860]

>>4981825
fucking lol

[Anonymous No.4981861]

[Anonymous No.4981874]

Assuming you needed to choose wouldn't it be best to cause the most people to die to curb overpopulation?

[Anonymous No.4981878]

>>4981874
overpopulation doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.4981879]

>>4981805
Depends on who the tied-up people are and who put them where they are.

[Anonymous No.4981880]

>>4981874
Overconsumption is the problem far more than overpopulation. If we all expect to live the way the modern Western middle-or-above-class person does, then sure, we're overpopulated, but it's possible to live with a good standard of living without being the ridiculous rampant consumers we are.

[Anonymous No.4981881]

I like this one better.

[Anonymous No.4981883]

>>4981878
Sure it does. In a world where automation has largely removed the connection between population and economic output, imagine how much better things would be if there were only half as many people.

[Anonymous No.4981889]

>>4981881
Why would you not pull it in this instance?

[Anonymous No.4981890]

>>4981880
I'd rather every person outside of America die than the cost of gasoline go up by a single dollar a gallon.

[Anonymous No.4981895]

>>4981890
Who said anything about raising prices?

[Anonymous No.4981896]

>>4981889
>hurr durr altruism doesn't exist

come on m8 everyone knows what you're pulling

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.4981911]

>>4981840
I think he'd just not do anything with the lever. Like >>4981812 and >>4981818

[Anonymous No.4981944]

>>4981805
yeah I'd have to switch the track to kill the one dude.

There's nothing inherently wrong with killing - we kill things all the time. My body is actively killing bacteria and viruses right now, and I need to kill things in order to eat, just like every other living thing. To kill to save is a perfectly morally valid choice, therefore. If, however, I were to switch the track not because I wanted to save lives, but rather because I hated the man on the other track (perhaps he put the other people there and then I tied him up and put him on the other track), then it would be wrong to pull the lever and kill him; that would be murder.

Intentionality, nigglets. It matters.

What I think would be really interesting is what if we suppose the one person on the alternate track is 25 years old and pregnant, and the other five people on the other track are all women who I know to be over the age of 60. What do I do then? To me, the question just got a lot harder. I can either save 3 lives more by running over the pregnant lady, or I can kill the old ladies and hope that the pregnant lady and her child will live to produce more offspring than the lives I allowed to end that day. Hm...

[Anonymous No.4981957]

>>4981944
You're still pulling the lever intentionally regardless of motivation.

[Anonymous No.4981958]

>>4981883
well for one thing, science would advance more slowly, as would literature and pretty much every other human endeavor not driven by automation. If we view society as a highly threaded processor of data wherein each person's brain is one more thread with which to process data, we are effectively downclocking civilization drastically by halving our population.

For another, we would be at half strength if we were invaded by space aliens or had to all work really hard to build something to save the species.

I mean, obviously there is such a thing as overpopulation for a planet - and I think we are near it or at it. But let's not pretend that there are not consequences of being underpopulated as well.

[Anonymous No.4981960]

>>4981957
That's fine. What's important is that in one case I intend to kill someone, while in the other I intend to save four people. There is a moral difference to my intentions.

[Anonymous No.4981963]

>>4981944
>hope that the pregnant lady and her child will live to produce more offspring
natalist detected

[Anonymous No.4981967]

>>4981944
scared to death, scared to look, you shook
cause ain't no such things as half way spooks

[Anonymous No.4981973]

>>4981963
how so? I mean, I didn't think I was. I thought natalists were folks who didn't believe that we should keep reproducing. If that's true then I'm the opposite of them if I save the pregnant lady, correct?

[Anonymous No.4981982]

>>4981826

The possibility of the trolley being empty exists, so this is the best answer.

[Anonymous No.4981992]

am I allowed to attach a shodinger's cat to the lever so that both sides are simultaneously dead and not dead as long as I don't look?

[Anonymous No.4981993]

>>4981973
natalists are folks who do believe that we should reproduce

[Anonymous No.4981995]

>>4981992
>shodinger's cat
don't start this bullshit

[Anonymous No.4981996]

>>4981973
lemayo

[Anonymous No.4981997]

>>4981992
shrodinger*

[Anonymous No.4981999]

>>4981997
schrondinger*

[Anonymous No.4982002]

>>4981996
ah, lol I guess I had that dead wrong. Should have just thought of the word's etymology and I would have been more on the mark. Sure, I'm kind of a natalist by default, I think. I'm still not sure I'd not kill the pregnant girl and fetus to save the old ladies though. After all, it is saving 5 certain lives to MAYBE save more.

[Anonymous No.4982006]

>I am holding the handle.
>The train approaches to my right.
>The track divides ahead.
>Two people scream from the tracks on my left.
>I know the lever changes the direction.
>I know these screams.
>I have been here before.
>It is always the same choice.
>The rules seldom vary.
>The screams never end.
>Blood splatters dully against me each time.
>I can't anymore.
>I throw myself in front of the train.
>I am holding the lever.
>The train approaches from my right.
>The track divides ahead.

[Anonymous No.4982008]

>>4982002
should have written "saving 5 certain lives as opposed to MAYBE saving more"

I need to sleep

[Anonymous No.4982026]

Pull the lever early enough, so you have enough time to untie/cut the guy out of the ropes.

[Anonymous No.4982046]

>>4981805
so this is trying to determine whether or not i want to be directly responsible for the death of one to save five or whether i want to be indirectly responsible for the death of five to save one?
personally i would need a reason to act saving one number four higher than the other isnt valid to me
to act i would need to know those people simple numbers are not good enough

[Anonymous No.4982079]

>>4982006
nice

[Anonymous No.4982157]

>>4982006
how the fuck does blood splatter "dully?"

[Anonymous No.4982163]

>>4981853
The trolley is just a metaphor in this problem. There's no one "in" it, the question is would you sacrifice one life to save 5?

[Anonymous No.4982172]

Why does everyone think they're smarter than the problem? There's no other aspect to it. There isn't anyone on the trolley, there isn't any time to save everyone, and no you can't jump onto the tracks.

[Anonymous No.4982180]

>>4981805
The path with one guy tied to the tracks.

[Anonymous No.4982181]

>>4982157
In slow motion, its thicker density laden with other soft tissues and congealing into a darker colour than the quick arterial flow which still contains its oxygen supply, the blood becomes so common as to be unfelt, its soft thud falling with as much resonance as a sunset on an overcast day.

[Anonymous No.4982186]

>>4982180
What if that guy is more important to society than the rest?

What if his death will trigger a war? There's no way to know, let whoever dies die.

[Anonymous No.4982196]

>>4982186
Probabilistically speaking, wouldn't the five have a 5 times better chance of triggering a war than the one?

[Anonymous No.4982199]

>>4982196
No, they only tie commoners together.

[Anonymous No.4982205]

>>4982186
I'm comfortable with the implications of my actions, less so with the implications of inaction.

The original path is 500% more likely to have someone whose death would have been unexpectedly important.

[Anonymous No.4982216]

>>4982006
>implying suicide is an option in the underlying philosophical question
>being this incapable of grasping metaphor

[Anonymous No.4982327]

>>4981896
Well it doesn't. Every action begins with "I want to". You can't act against your own interests.

[Anonymous No.4982431]

What's the answer?

[Anonymous No.4982472]

>>4982431
Pull the lever. Watch the fuckers die.
Go to the survivor and curbstomb his ugly face.

Duh.

[Anonymous No.4982483]

>>4981851

So what if they are five mentally retarded vegetables and the one guy is the one who will save millions of lives by inventing the next vaccine to some horrible disease that would scour the planet of human filth?

Fuck you people and your garbage reductionist "thought" experiments.

[Anonymous No.4982496]

>>4982483
But if someone didn't pull the lever you would die

[Anonymous No.4982499]

>>4982181
I want to play D&D with you so bad right now.

[Anonymous No.4982560]

i dont want to undermine law and order

[Anonymous No.4982599]

put a penny on the track, works every time

[Anonymous No.4982602]

>>4982496

And you better make sure I do, because if I survive I will devote the rest of my life to make anyone you care about suffer. All as part of a goodnatured thought-experiment among friends, of course.

Now how does that balance in your little Scotsman's shopkeeper's ledger of moral gains and losses?

Fucking tool.

[Anonymous No.4983859]

[Anonymous No.4983870]

Of course I save the fucking five guys, how is this even a thing.

You guys are bunch of fucking autists.

[Anonymous No.4983895]

The only sensible option

[Anonymous No.4983926]

>>4983870
That's funny because utilitarianism is the most autistic ethical position you can take.

[Anonymous No.4983927]

>>4983895

I don't know why, but answers like this seem to be the most healthy ones.

Who the fuck would leave witnesses? People are going to die, just kill everybody, so it never happened.

The only moral outcome is either letting everybody live, or letting everybody die. Since one is impossible due to the setting, and the other would mean the end of your being, killing everybody that is at risk of dying is the most fair choice to yourself and others.

I dread the day I meet somebody who truly believes he has the right to choose in this kind of scenario. Nobody should have the right to choose, so one must act in the most fair of ways; just fucking kill everybody who has a chance of dying, and live on yourself.

[Anonymous No.4983936]

>>4983926
Why?

[Anonymous No.4983943]

>>4983936
Because [insert slippery slope fallacy here]

[Anonymous No.4983946]

>>4981889
Because if I die, I cease to exist.
If someone else dies, I can learn to live with it. Even Kant (of the Categorical Imperative) said that if it is a choice between you and the other guy, the other guy's gotta go.

[Anonymous No.4983955]

>>4983943
I mean, I would save those five people. Less bad feels would arrive from it.

but in the other hand if I had a button that would kill half of the worlds population I would do that too.

[Anonymous No.4983963]

>>4983926
Not in this example you fucking retard. Assuming all of these people are strangers, it is not at all autistic to use practicality to save the most lives.

Even if you know the 1 person and still make the practical decision to run him over because it saves more lives, it doesn't mean all that happened was you added up the number of people and made a conclusion from that. Someone could be very emotionally distressed by choosing to kill their friend and still have done it because it was the logical choice.

[Anonymous No.4983975]

>The one person is your dearest of friends

Would he want you to pull the lever, or not? Think about this, it should tell a lot about your friend. Don't confuse your own feelings towards your friend into this.

[Anonymous No.4983993]

[Anonymous No.4983994]

>>4983975
I understand both pulling and not pulling and hold no grudge against him.

[Anonymous No.4984025]

>>4981805

Holy shit, I think I'm onto something here:

>Let 5 die

I value the life of one person as 5 lives.

>kill one

I value the life of a single person as 0.2 lives.


Maybe I should let 5 die, look the survivor in the eyes and have some speech how I gave him a second chance, and how he/she should now live a life five times as valuable as a normal person would.

[Anonymous No.4984031]

>>4984025
Man, this is like "EAT THE EGGS".

[Anonymous No.4984041]

>>4983993
The trolley will probably stop after running over a dozen or so people.

[Anonymous No.4984046]

>>4983993

>Top rail is niggers
>Bottom rail is jew

What now?

[Anonymous No.4984051]

no path

[Anonymous No.4984053]

>>4984031

>"EAT THE EGGS"

?

[Anonymous No.4984058]

>>4984053

some guy rescues a girl and when she awakens he has a bowl of eggs and requests that she eats them

or something

[Anonymous No.4984061]

[Anonymous No.4984080]

>>4984058
>>4984053
it is le ebin meme from /b/

[Anonymous No.4984092]

>>4984061
Easily the best one.
I especially like the grenade in the guy's hand, presumably to kill anyone who tries to get away.

[Anonymous No.4984093]

>>4984080

How the fuck is this funny?

And this comes from somebody who laughs to fart sounds when tired.

[Anonymous No.4984109]

>>4984093
The joke is that the person who wrote that greentext thought he was whiteknighting, not being the weirdest guy imaginable

[Anonymous No.4984131]

>>4984093
Because forcing women to eat eggs is my fetish.

[Anonymous No.4984166]

>>4984080
>le ebin meme from /b/

You look dumb saying this stupid shit.

[Anonymous No.4984178]

>>4984166
Anonymous posters can't look like anything, as they do not exist in a meaningful way. The words can look dumb, but they are not connected to me in anyway so idgaf yolo swag suck nigger dicks erryday rofl

[Anonymous No.4984229]

>>4981805
of course, the only path

[Anonymous No.4984313]

>>4983975

Yeah, this >>4983994.

[Anonymous No.4984315]

>>4981958
But politically the world would be so much easier to manage, less corruption and more equality. We could actually pull of socialist utopian village states

[Anonymous No.4985090]

>>4981805
i derail the trolley. not hard.

[Scar the Lion !Wj.GNJq7ao No.4985101]

Too many variables, I switch it so five people are saved and walk away

[Anonymous No.4985114]

>>4981805
Let me simplify it for you, people.

[Anonymous No.4985130]

>>4981839

5 > 1

[Anonymous No.4985146]

[Anonymous No.4985160]

>>4985146
Sorry, kiddies, but it's leap of faith time.

[Anonymous No.4985164]

>>4983859
>Heather
>Becky
>Caroline

[Anonymous No.4987809]

>>4981805
bump

[Anonymous No.4987812]

Pull the lever.
This isn't philosophy.
I hate these stupid fucking scenarios.
Die soon, please?

[Anonymous No.4987856]

>>4987812
>this murderer

[Anonymous No.4987988]

That trolley looks pretty small. I could probably stop it.

[Anonymous No.4988013]

there is no choice.

[Anonymous No.4988029]

Why do people bother puzzling out these scenarios that would never happen, ever?

[Anonymous No.4988048]

>>4988029
If I ever become a billionaire criminal I'm gonna set up this experiment, kidnap random people and let them make these choices.

[Anonymous No.4988051]

[Anonymous No.4988078]

it doesn't matter how many times you post this. nonintervention will never stop being correct

[Anonymous No.4988106]

The ONE PROBLEM no utilitarian or analytic philosopher will be able to answer.

[Anonymous No.4988115]

Did someone ever draw the variation where there's the possibility of throwing a really fat man on the rails?

[Anonymous No.4988132]

>>4988115
There are several drawings, yes.

[Anonymous No.4988147]

>>4988132
A trolley of that height wouldn't clear the bridge. Unless it just pushes the bridge along so you can drop the fat guy on the last three in hope of a quicker death, this is a terrible illustration.

[Anonymous No.4988154]

>>4983993
this one always sends me into uncontrollable fits of chuckling

[Anonymous No.4988183]

Pull the lever, then try to save the one guy tied up.

Or don't, and try to save the five, but that's pretty unlikely.

[Anonymous No.4988194]

Hold a gun to someone else's head and tell them to pull the lever.

[Anonymous No.4988218]

>>4988048
that's what the japanese manga Kaiji is about.

[Anonymous No.4988321]

[Anonymous No.4988444]

Which path Lit?

[Anonymous No.4988532]

>>4988444
Like this

[Anonymous No.4988550]

>>4988532
But there are people tied up on all 3 tracks

[Anonymous No.4988554]

>>4988550
Where?

[Anonymous No.4988571]

>>4981825
>that absolutely awful reasoning

[Anonymous No.4988580]

>>4988571
>thatsthejoke.webm

[Anonymous No.4988586]

>>4988554
it's your choice

[Anonymous No.4988633]

I got this.

[Anonymouse !7tLDpBrPEk No.4988640]

>>4984229
Fucking golden
Why you haven't received the attention you deserve for the first bit of OC on /lit/ in months, I don't know.
Nietzsche text doesn't come fast enough, actually
But it's solid

[Anonymous No.4988679]

>>4985130

[Anonymous No.4988714]

>>4982006
nice

[Anonymous No.4988726]

>>4984229
real nice

[Anonymous No.4988739]

>>4981805
can anyone link to the original thread?

[Anonymous No.4988834]

>>4988106
OK I know that's Peter Singer but who are the people down below?

[Anonymous No.4988891]

>>4988834
Leftmost is Zizek. That's all I know.

[Anonymous No.4990738]

There should be one where the choice is money or throwing the switch

[Anonymous No.4991354]

>>4990738
Yeah

[Anonymous No.4991361]

Which one, /lit/?

[Anonymous No.4991372]

>>4981879
Depends what race they were. If the single person was my own race I wouldn't pull the lever

[Anonymous No.4991380]

[Anonymous No.4991395]

>>4991361
Do nothing but stare at my giant penis

[Anonymous No.4991409]

>>4991361
Quickly think about naked hotties to give myself an instant boner and pull the lever

[Anonymous No.4991426]

>>4981805

There is only one clear solution to this problem: to assert the emptiness of counterfactual speculation. What could be the case in some alternate state of affairs is cannot be resolved because we cannot know what the case is if the case is no longer the case.

It follows that there is no "right path" because there is no path in this state of affairs.

[Anonymous No.4991431]

>>4981805