Philippa Foot presented a series of moral dilemmas when she discussed abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect. One famous problem of her was the trolley dilemma: “..he is the driver of a runaway tram which he can only steer from one narrow track onto another; five men are working on one track and one on the other; anyone the tack he enters is bound to be killed.” (Foot, 1967, p. 2) What should the driver do? Despite what he does, he will harm someone!1
The article described details about the infamous Pinto fire case. The problem presents an insider account of the context and decision environment that the company cannot recall of defective vehicles. Therefore, the company give a cognitive script analysis of factors that seem like an explanation lead to decisions to improve this problem as well as a definitive study in unethical company behavior.
In “Women at Work,” an article adapted from the work of La Verne Bradley published in the August 1944 edition of National Geographic Magazine, the strength and perseverance of women during war times is explored. Prior to World War II, the workplace was seen as “a no woman’s land” (Bradley, 144, p. 83). During World War II woman began filling their men’s’ shoes more than ever before as they filed into factories (Bradley, 1944, p. 83). “At the same time [as preparing and helping their country with the war], [women] worked hard to keep their homes or set up new ones” (Bradley, 1944, p. 75).
I think I will divert the train to the right killing one person because one person is less important than five. Sometimes it is important to do what is right than what is morally good to do. The utilitarianism is a moral theory that gives happiness to the number of people in the society and it has been considered greatness, an action is morally appropriate if its outcomes lead to happiness and wrong if it results in sadness. I will begin by describing what Mill might do in the Trolley situation. Next, I will contrast what Kant might do in this situation and lastly, I will be also going to give my opinion on this Trolley situation.
Railroad crossing can be very dangerous if you don’t know how to act around them and their laws. To begin, there are a few rules and suggestions to follow. To begin, remember that trains always have right of way. The movie title, “It Is Your Choice” lets us know that it can take more than a mile for a train to come to a complete stop. Also, it lets us know that trains, unlike cars, can’t swerve away and have to stay on the train tracks. This means you should never try to cut off a train. Additionally, it is against the law to walk on a train track. It is trespassing to walk on a train track. Many times, it is hard to notice when a train is coming because it is hard to hear the sounds it makes. This is especially true for more modern trains
runaway trolley and the only way to save five people on the tracks is to sacrifice
Feeling guilty shows a person’s awarness of social criticism which is related to social control. In the The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn , individuals feeling guilty is a major component of society. During his trip on the Mississippi river, Huck thinks he is committing a sin by opposing society and defending Jim. On the river Huck meets some men searching for runaway slaves, Huck creates a story about his dad having smallpox on the raft. The men are scared of catching smallpox and give Huck money and instruct him not to let people know that his dad’s sick when searching for help. Once the men leave, Huck admits, "I knowed very well I had done wrong, and I see it waren't no use for me to try to learn to do right” (pg69). Society’s norms make
Ethical drift is when an individual, groups or organization start acting against of ethical behavior. (Kleinman, 2006). Ethical drift may occur gradually and without premeditated consciousness. It may occur unconsciously without people realizing that they have changed their formal ethical standards, (Kleinman, 2006). I have observed ethical drift occurring in the insurance sector where a chronic patient paid some amount of money to an insurance broker's account to get life insurance for the same premium as healthy persons. The strategy that could have addressed the ethical drift mentioned in this analysis is recognizing the need for change and maintaining a vigilant awareness of professional boundaries (Kleinman,
This session I am asked to review the following case study and provide three perspectives on the ethical decision facing Angela. Rae, (2009), outlines several theories related to the decision-making process. Ethical Egoism, Virtue Theory, and My perspective will be focused on.
In this assignment I would like to explore the Trolley Problem, more specifically the variant which is called Bystander at the Switch. First I would propose my opinion on what should be done and why. Then I would propose a counter-argument which may be invoked in response to my reasoning, of which I would attempt to resolve.
Every day, people cram into crowded subway trains to go to work, school, or play. NYC is blessed with an excellent subway system, especially compared to other American cities, yet it's also one of the dirtiest, smelliest, most uncomfortable subway system in the world. The subway gets you there, but certainly isn't a luxury experience. One of the biggest qualms we have of the subway here is the chronic overcrowding on trains. It seems that there isn't a single time of day where one has a seat. In fact, during rush hours, getting a seat on the subway is roughly equivalent, statistically, to winning the lottery. Yes, the subway sucks when you have to stand, but what if you had to stand in a train that is 100% full? What is "the maximum torture factor?" In other words, what is the maximum of the number of people that could fit in one entire 10 car train,
In this age of groundbreaking technology and completely autonomous cars, we are faced with several new morally challenging questions. This is the future and we have to answer them. If we don’t, we run the risk of never advancing as a species. Lauren Davis concurs with this statement in her article “Would You Pull the Trolley Switch? Does it Matter?” written in The Atlantic “you eventually reach a point where you have to make some decisions, and not everybody will agree.” Whose life should be valued more? In the following situation: a completely autonomous car on a collision course with a pedestrian(s), and the only other option is to swerve and kill the passenger(s). Who should the car protect? In most scenario variations, the car default should be programmed to swerve and kill the passenger with the expectations of unbuckled passengers and infant/pregnant passengers.
I am first presented with a scenario involving a runaway trolley that is out of control and if left alone it will kill five people. However, if I were to be standing next to the lever the trolley would switch path and only kill one person. In a different scenario I am on a bridge next to a better large person and I am watching the trolley head towards the five individuals, and if I stand around and do nothing they will be killed. However, I have the option of choosing to stand around and watch the five individuals get killed or push the very large man over and manage to stop the trolley and save the five individuals but kill the very large individual. After reading the scenarios and evaluating my options, I found myself conflicted in deciding which would be the best choice. A utilitarian response seems to be drastic because there are no limits set to what an individual is not allowed to do in the pursuit of their happiness. While my choices were based on allowing the trolley to take its original course and not get involved in the situation myself.
Suppose a conductor is driving his train and the breaks are defect. The rails lead directly into a cluster of five people who would all die if the train will go this direction. However, the conductor can change onto another track where only one person is standing hence only one person would die. How should the conductor react (Hare, 1964)? Is it possible to condense the problem to a rather simple maximization problem in example that the action is taken, which would kill the least people? Utilitarianisms would answer the question in the affirmative and change the track so only one person has to suffer. However, we have to question if the Utilitarianism is applicable to such ethical questions (Smart & Williams, 1973). This essay will outline several strength and weaknesses of the Utilitarianism devised by Jeremy Bentham. Firstly, the Utilitarianism will be outlined, secondly some strength and weaknesses are explained by employing examples, and thirdly several solution approaches for dilemmas Bentham’s Utilitarianism is facing will be sketched.