The Pros And Cons Of The Trolley Problem

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.

Conflict between individual good and the common good is at the core of this issue; hence it is really important to note that California seems to set the trends that the rest of the country has a tendency to follow. Of course the common good is always defined by the State, or the group of usually power hungry people who have gained control of the helm of Government. The United States has a responsibility of preventing illnesses and death, but not at the cost of our freedom to choose what is best for our family and individual needs. Of course the individual’s decision should be a well informed and educated one not a choice the state should make for us, but to help guide us in the right direction to make a confident choice. Vaccinations are felt to be one our healthiest actions. However, a moral dilemma lies in the balance of personal autonomy and choice versus protection of the risk of the entire population. During public emergencies such as an epidemic, of course vaccines should be mandated for mankind, but otherwise the decision should be a personal

McKenzie and two other prisoners, “got over the walls of the supposed escape proof death house of three men sentenced to die in the electric chair” (McCormick 10A). Pete McKenzie was able to find a way to escape the death house, a task that was considered impossible. He observed the correctional officers, took note of the best times to escape, and planned accordingly with the other prisoners. Not only did he use his clever mind to escape prison, in an incident where a prisoner awaiting electrocution charged at an officer with a razor, McKenzie saved him and took the injury of the razor. After he was applauded, he had a chance to say, “Every time something violent happens to me they say ‘He’s a killer--he’s dangerous’. Well I’m not” (Pete McKenzie Still Hopeful of Release 23). McKenzie did something brave and had the opportunity to change the narrative slightly by explaining that he is not dangerous, just fearless. This gives people a new perspective on why McKenzie does what he does. Pete McKenzie was clever and was able to observe things and plan accordingly, and give people a new narrative of

Shot and killed him. In addition as to why we know the sniper would kill without hesitation, for

Answering the call to serve causes enough moral conflict and killing for the war only adds to it. Tim O’Brien struggles to make sense of his thoughts after killing a Vietnamese man while outside of My Khe. O’Brien writes “The Man I Killed” detailing how the man’s disfigured appearance looks repetitively, and dreaming about what the man’s life must of been like before his death. Afterwards O’Brien reflects saying, “It was entirely automatic. I did not hate the young man; I did not see him as the enemy…” (p. 126). Though he does not see him as the enemy, O’Brien reacts as he had been taught to in war; to forget most of your morals and shoot before you can be shot first, a fact Kiowa points out to him. “Later, I remember, Kiowa tried to tell me that the man would 've died anyway. He told me that it was a good kill, that I was a soldier and this was a war, that I should shape up and stop staring and ask myself what the dead man would ' ve done if things were reversed” (p. 127). Soldiers are expected to forget their morals and act as a soldier should. This leaves many confused with their actions and searching for their lost

Sandel, Michael J. (2009). Justice: What’s the right thing to do? New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

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.

Aztecs, and also we all at some point have to choose between two or more unethical acts, as in the case of Harry Truman, which a rigid moral code would not allow us to

The case study that I chosen is the Conflict of Interest: Case study 2. As it mentioned in the case study, Hardeep who is the IT manager in a government department with more than 500 staff members and six branches across the Australia. He received the two offers from company A and company B of proposal (RFP) for the procurement of the software for the new ERP system. Now he is in an ethical dilemma when he has to choose the best offer, as he found out the offer who made by Mandeep is the general manager of company B is his best friend. He discovered that the offer from company A is better than company B. He realized that company B’s software may require more modification where increase the total cost. To resolve this conflict of interest, I would like to use Thomas White’s Framework. Thomas White’s framework for ethical decision making should be more useful to deal with situations in dilemma.

Assisted suicide is a rather controversial issue in contemporary society. When a terminally ill patient formally requests to be euthanized by a board certified physician, an ethical dilemma arises. Can someone ethically end the life of another human being, even if the patient will die in less than six months? Unlike traditional suicide, euthanasia included multiple individuals including the patient, doctor, and witnesses, where each party involved has a set of legal responsibilities. In order to understand this quandary and eventually reach a conclusion, each party involved must have their responsibilities analyzed and the underlying guidelines of moral ethics must be investigated. Even though assisted suicide was not discussed throughout the sixteen to eighteen hundreds, ethical philosophers investigated the roots of human morals in an attempt to create an overarching rule that would help determine if “death with dignity” is morally justified.

Golf trolleys have been a big part of a golf player 's life already. Because of how very helpful it is to them and how it plays a huge part in the convenience of playing golf. Today, there are a lot of golf trolley models that are available in the market, some of this you can check at http://www.offmetrolley.com. Many golf player and enthusiast agree that owning one golf trolley is a must if you want a different experience when playing golf. Play this sport without thinking of the hassle of carrying a golf bag anywhere you go and just rely to the golf trolley to do its thing. But if you want a different kind of convenience, then you can settle in an electric golf trolley which is better compare to a push or manual trolley when it comes to performance and durability. In this article, we listed two reasons why owning an electric golf trolley is important to every golf enthusiast out there.

Who chooses death over life? Sometimes we have to make this decision over a loved one when there is no hope for their recovery. It would be incredibly hard to make this life or death decision on another human being and twice as hard when it is someone we love. The author discusses the argument of this controversial topic of sustaining life at any cost or dying peacefully as an ethical issue. An ethicist, a person who specializes in or writes on ethics, can provide valuable discernment with respect to right and wrong motives or actions. Involving a medically trained ethicist to provide family members with some guidance on this very difficult decision can be helpful. In the article, “When living is a Fate Worse than Death”, Christine Mitchell describes a sympathetic, emotional look into the life and death of a family’s little girl.

In James Rachels’s “What is Morality”, Rachels dissects the idea of a minimum conception and examines various moral dilemmas. His idea of minimum conception is not to narrow down morality, but to narrow down the aspects or “cores” of morality. Rachels believes that this can be used develop a universal morality that can apply to every situation. In second part of the article, Rachels presents three examples of real life moral dilemmas and two opposing views for each situation. This examples touch on the issue of euthanasia, but have different purposes and consequences. Rachels ends this article by addressing the importance reasoning and impartiality, which factors back in to the idea of minimum conception.

Self-driving cars are a new form of emerging technology. An article that was recently published discussed the positive and negative effects of self-driving buses which led to research on self-driving cars. The emerging technology of driverless vehicles was introduced on public roadways. Crelin stated that “Long predicted to be an impending and emerging technology, driverless vehicles developed slowly over the course of the twentieth century but emerged fully into public view in the first decades of the twenty-first” (1). There were a lists of the aspects and concerns of self-driving cars. Hosansky mainly discussed how self-driving cars are related to technologies in use today. Self-driving cars have been both supported and

How interested would you be if somebody offered to hire you a chauffeur which could drive you anywhere, come back to pick you up, and be completely free to you? Odds are, you would be jumping all over it. However, robotic, not human, helpers may be the next great milestone in transportation. Tomorrow, maybe, completely autonomous cars will steer themselves across mountain ranges and through downtowns. Across the world, hundreds of millions or even perhaps billions of people will be safer than ever, more prosperous than ever, and more efficient than ever. Despite, some people will say self-driving cars will foster an environment of less safety, rather than more. They say hackers may be able gain control of cars from the outside. However, this is not true because the sensors on a car can and will be programmed to automatically detect and shut down malicious invaders, through reasons which I actually will explain later. When the next great locomotion revolution comes, everyone needs to be ready to embrace all the benefits and great luxuries which will come with self-driving cars without any hesitation.