Today I will be going over a runaway issue that is sweeping this discussion using utilitarian ethics.
The
first version of this kind of ethics deals with what is called the “Switch dilemma,” it is popular
trope used widely by writer’s that involves a runaway train on a track where it will kill one
person or five depending on your choice by the switch before you. The next version of this is the
“footbridge dilemma,” granted not as popular as the above dilemma or meme worthy, but in this
one we have the power to stop the train this time by pushing a fat man over the bridge. So, in this
discussion I will be going over both dilemma’s, while giving you all my perspective on these
topics and my stance on the matter of utilitarian.
In case one for the ‘Switch dilemma,” The only Moral choice is to flip the switch onto the one
person instead of the four working on the track. My reasoning in this is to minimize total harm
by saving four lives at the cost of one, achieving the greatest good for the greatest number that I
can at that time of flipping the switch. As a bystander it is my moral responsibility to act, and by
failing to act then that results in the deaths of many or in this case four people. Inaction is still an
action, as no answer is still an answer, because the absence of something is still an answer again,
it is like choosing to watch them all die at that point.
Just like with the “switch dilemma,” I would choose to push the fat man when it comes to the
“footbridge dilemma,” each time due to the response I gave earlier in this discussion over the
pervious response. The prompt states that pushing him stops the Train saving the people on the
track, it goes back to the greater good topic for me in that case. My inactivity would cause more
harm than good, true it may end his life, but there is nothing within this moral question that states
he would die because of me pushing him. If we used logic, sure it will, and Id live with the
consequences of my actions if that was the case because at that point, I saved the many.
I also want to take a moment to compare these dilemmas before giving my concluding thoughts
on the matter of the trolly problem. Socially from both dilemmas, as a society the switch
dilemma is the most widely acceptable of the two. I feel this way due to the nature of it, the
switch is impersonal and indirect, while pushing the fat man is more personal as we are directly
provoking violence onto another. We are taught by our caretakers, schools, and social norms that
indirect harm is more acceptable than direct harm. So out of both it makes sense why most
people from the video would not push the fat man, its out of most people’s nature to do so, and
most will watch in get into a state of moral relativism.
In summary, both of theses dilemmas are at the end of the day just hypothetical, it provides us
with a way to explore these moral choices in a safe space. They allow us to see how we are as a
society, building a framework in other scenarios along with their consequences. Despite my tone
in this response to the discussion, this is an interesting topic, as it allowed me to be objective and
think outside of the norm than me per usual way of doing things in a discussion board. I will
conclude with I will not push any of you in real life fellow readers, I was merely giving you my
moral choice was all, and I always strive to do what is just and good in real life,
