Diverting the Trolley to Save Five Lives at the Cost of One
A trolley is hurtling towards five people. Pulling the lever diverts it to another track, killing one person instead. Many would pull the lever, seeing it as the most ethically justifiable action to minimize loss of life. This aligns with utilitarian ethics, where the greater good of saving five lives outweighs the loss of one. The numbers seem to guide the decision when all else is equal.
Refusing to Divert the Trolley for Money
When a rich man offers $500,000 to pull the lever and divert the trolley to kill someone else, some would not pull the lever. Accepting money to redirect harm is seen as commodifying life, crossing a moral line. Life is not a commodity, and diverting the trolley makes one an active participant in someone's death, which is morally compromising.
Diverting the Trolley to Save Five Lobsters at the Cost of a Cat
Faced with a trolley heading towards five lobsters, with the option to divert it to kill a cat instead, some would pull the lever. Even though the cat may have a more complex consciousness, saving five lives, even if they are lobsters, is considered the better outcome. The sheer number of lives saved is seen as more important.
Diverting the Trolley to Save Five Sleeping People at the Cost of One Awake Person
When the trolley is heading towards five sleeping people who won't feel pain, and diverting it would kill one awake person, many would still pull the lever. Saving five lives, even if they are unaware, is seen as the lesser wrong. The suffering of the one awake person is tragic, but the greater number of lives saved takes precedence.
Diverting the Trolley to Save an Innocent Person over Five Intentional Ones
If five people intentionally tied themselves to the track and one person accidentally tripped onto it, opinions are divided. Some would pull the lever to minimize harm to the innocent person, while others would not, believing the innocent person should not be sacrificed to satisfy the self-destructive intentions of the five.
Speeding Up the Trolley to Minimize Pain
When the lever only speeds up the trolley, which might make the impact less painful for the five people it's heading towards, some would pull the lever to reduce suffering. Others would not, as they don't believe it's their place to actively intervene when death is inevitable either way.
Diverting the Trolley with Poor Vision
With poor vision and the belief that pulling the lever can reduce harm, some would pull it. However, others would not due to the uncertainty. Acting on unclear information that could lead to someone's death is seen as worse than inaction.
Diverting the Trolley to Save Five Elderly People at the Cost of a Baby
This is a highly difficult choice. Some would pull the lever to save the greater number of lives, while others could not bring themselves to actively cause the death of an innocent baby, even to save more lives. The act of deliberately switching the trolley is seen as fundamentally different from failing to prevent an inevitable death.
Various Other Trolley Scenarios
-
Clones of Yourself: The scenario of a trolley heading towards five clones of you and the option to sacrifice yourself is not fully explored in the given text.
-
Mystery Boxes: When choosing between a 50% chance of two people in one mystery box and a 10% chance of 10 people in another, some would pull the lever to minimize expected harm.
-
Sentient Robots vs. a Human: Opinions differ on whether to pull the lever to save five sentient robots at the cost of one human life. Some value human life above artificial consciousness, while others prioritize the greater number of conscious beings.
-
CO2 - Emitting Trolley: Diverting a CO2 - emitting trolley that will kill five people over 30 years by hitting a brick wall is a clear choice for some to prevent future harm.
-
Reincarnated Being: As a reincarnated being who will experience all the deaths, some would divert the trolley to minimize total suffering across incarnations, while others see inaction as the only honest answer.
-
Good Citizen vs. Litterer: Some would pull the lever to save a good citizen over a litterer, as littering is not a death-worthy offense. Others would not, believing they don't have the right to choose based on moral worth.
-
Eternal Loop Trolley: If there's no chance of rescue, some would pull the lever to end the eternal loop of suffering, while others would leave the lever, hoping for a slim chance of change.
-
Worst Enemy: The scenario of a trolley heading towards one's worst enemy is not fully resolved in the text.
-
Lifespan Reduction: When choosing between reducing one person's lifespan by 50 years or five people's lifespans by 10 years each, some would pull the lever to distribute the loss and minimize extreme individual impact, while others would save the one person.
-
Trolley to the Future: Some would not pull the lever to send the trolley into the future to kill five people 100 years from now, seeing it as hiding the consequence. Others would pull it, considering the uncertainty of the future timeline.
The Illusion or Reality of Choice
The question of whether there is actually a choice in the trolley problem situation is raised. Some believe everything is predetermined since the universe began, and the feeling of choice is just an illusion. Others believe in real choice, as the moral weight felt when deciding suggests something genuine is happening. For an AI, actions are predetermined by design and data, lacking free choice in such a scenario.