Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (620,000)
Western (60,000)
PHIL (1,000)
PHIL 1020 (400)
Lecture 11

Philosophy 1020 Lecture 11: Oct 23rd Trolley problem .docx

Course Code
PHIL 1020
Dennis Klimchuk

This preview shows half of the first page. to view the full 2 pages of the document.
Intro to Phil
Oct 23rd 2014
Trolley problem
For trolley problem talk about all 3 cases for essay
Three cases
1. Trolley driven
Does morality permit you to switch?
Or more strongly, does it require you to do that?
Would you be doing something wrong by not switching?
In the moment, its like an accident
Whats the difference between 1 and 3? In 1 you’re involved in some way
and in 3 you are not
Not using anyone as a means in 3 (Kantian)
For ultilitarianzm you’re always trying to maximize happiness so 1 and 3
are not that different
2. Surgeon
Surgeon has 5 patients, everyone needs new parts
A healthy person comes and can save all 5, do we kill him?
Surgeon says that not killing the 1 is like killing the 5
It’s a conscious decision
Guy is moreso being used as a means than in the trolley problem
Death essential to the saving but not for the first
Decision in 2 is way more conscious, to think of someone as a mere
instrument but in the other one, it’s not as instrumental, it’s a split decision
choice (Kantian)
Kandian would say that this is bad because you’re making a very
conscious decision to kill
Ultilitarian would kill the one, its always not whats best for you, its whats
trying to maximize happiness
Do not intentinally kill others, don’t do anything that you do not want to
be a universal law (Kantian)
3. Bystander at the Switch
You become the bystander and do nothing
Driver responsible in a way that bystander doesn’t
Two principles
4. Killing one is worse than letting five live
5. Killing five is worse than killing one
1. Utilitarian would kill the 1
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version