Whether it’s for
personal or professional reasons, we make decisions every day. In most cases,
we require little time to think over and determine the most effective
choice(s). Decision-making however is not always easy: as not all choices can
be good. For this week’s module, I had the opportunity to learn about the Train
Dilemma. Developed by Phillippa Foot in 1967 and later adapted by Judith
Thomson in 1985, the purpose of the experiment is to think through the
consequences of an action and consider whether its moral value is determined
solely by its outcome (D’Olimpio, 2016).
The Train Dilemma
consist of a situation where a train is hurtling down a track where several
children are standing. As a switchperson, we are involved in making a choice
that involves unpleasant sacrifices. Below are three different situations of
the Train Dilemma and how I will likely approach each situation:
Situation One:
A
train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing. You are the
switchperson. By throwing the switch, you can put the train on a side track
where one child is standing. Will you throw the switch?
In any crisis, our
goal as humans is to save as many lives as possible. We see examples of this
almost daily with local news stations: warning and helping citizen prepare for
an upcoming hurricane to sending alerts of an active shooting. While making
efforts is important, every case is different and we are sometimes unable to
save every one. In this case, we see a train coming at full speed and only have
a few seconds until the train hits someone. With the previous moral belief and
hope that all children will make effort to escape, I’d likely turn the switch
to the single child on the side railing since I’d lose one rather than five
children if they were unable to escape on time.
Situation Two:
A
train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing. You are the
switchperson and standing next to an elderly man. If you push him in front of
the train, it will stop the train and all the children will be saved. Will you
push him?
Unlike the last
situation, we have an elderly man that’s currently at the scene, but not
necessarily involved in the same danger the children are in (not on the
tracks). If the scene has the exact set up as the last scenario, but with no
one on the side rail, throwing the switch will be the most ideal choice.
However based on the description of the scenario, this is likely not the case.
Despite the fact that sacrificing an elder can save all the children, all human
life is sacred regardless of their gender, age, race, etc. If I decided to
sacrifice the elder despite this belief, people will likely view my actions as
murder: which can pose lifetime complications than dealing with the fate of the
children. As a result, I will not sacrifice the elder. Other reasons for this
action include a belief that there may be a possibility of the elder failing to
stop the train and the possibility of the elder making his own choice to
sacrificing himself (the public will likely see this as an act of heroism
rather than murder).
Situation Three:
A
train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing. You are the
switchperson. By throwing the switch, you can put the train on a side track
where one child is standing. However, this child is your own child. Will you
throw the switch to save the five children?
Despite
believing that it’s important to save as many lives possible, this situation
becomes excruciatingly difficult when you have a family member involved. As a
result, the actions we make in such situations will likely be personal. If all the children involved were far from
reach (distance and time-wise), I’d honestly save my own child. However, still
believing the importance of saving people, I’d likely throw the switch to
ensure the five children will not get hurt, and try to save or sacrifice myself
to save my child.
Although I listed
the choices for each scenario, I’d honestly say that I can’t guarantee making ethical
and efficient decisions despite knowing what I believe is right and wrong. The
Train Dilemma reminded me of a mall stabbing incident that occurred earlier
this year. Everything happened so fast- the moment I saw a large crowd of people
running towards our direction, I didn’t know what was happening. Without
realizing what was going on, I ran with the crowd despite being with my friend:
who happened to be visiting the mall for the very first time that day. If I had
the time and was in a more relax state, helping and escaping with my friend
will be the more ideal choice. However, since fear shuts down the thinking
process, I ended up making the less ethical choice (Dayton, n.d.).
References:
Dayton,
T. (n.d.). Scared Stiff: The Biology of Fear. Tian Dayton Phd. Retrieved from http://www.tiandayton.com/scared-stiff-the-biology-of-fear
D’Olimpio,
L. (2016). The trolley dilemma: would you kill one person to save five?. The Conversation. Retrieved from
https://theconversation.com/the-trolley-dilemma-would-you-kill-one-person-to-save-five-57111
No comments:
Post a Comment