The Problem With the Trolley Problem

You've probably heard of the trolley problem, especially if you're at all interested in philosophy or ethics. Lately, it's been a subject of discussion when discussing autonomous cars and was referenced explicitly in the show The Good Place. Some people think it's a fun moral thought experiment to discuss in a group; others feel it's a good ethical workout to prepare for real-world ethical dilemmas.

But what if the trolley problem has a problem of its own? Well, before diving into the problem with the trolley problem, we've got one crucial thing to do: drive the trolley. The trolley problem goes like this: you're driving a trolley along a track when all of a sudden the brakes just stop working. If you stay on the track in front of you, you'll run over a group of five people standing on the track, but you have the option of pulling a switch and directing the trolley onto another track with just a single person standing on the track.

You have to choose between killing five people or one person. What is the morally correct thing to do? Do you flip the switch to save five people and kill one, or do you leave the switch alone, kill five, and leave one unharmed? The trolley problem is a widely used moral thought experiment, especially in beginner philosophy classes. The problem is often used to illustrate two branches of ethics: consequentialism and deontology.

Consequentialists focus on the consequences of an action, while deontologists emphasize a sense of moral duty. Utilitarianism is a prime example of consequentialism. Philosophers John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham considered the moral value of an action based on the outcome and whether it contributed to the greater good. If you were to consider the trolley problem from the consequentialist perspective, you'd quickly pull that switch to take just one life instead of the group of five. When more people get to live, that benefits the greater good.

On the other hand, a manual duty ethics challenges you to universalize a principle or maxim to see if it works regardless of circumstance. His classic example is lying. Can you imagine universalized lying as a maxim? If everyone lied all the time, you couldn't trust anything anyone said. Kant would suggest that lying is therefore immoral. From a Kantian perspective, the trolley problem is more challenging. Could you universalize your principle of killing someone to save others?

Imagine one person had five kidneys that could save the lives of five people. However, the kidney owner would have to be killed against their will to attain the organs. Killing the kidney owner instinctually feels wrong compared to flipping the switch in the trolley problem. It doesn't seem like you could universalize this principle of killing one to save five others.

The trolley problem is an excellent way to learn about these two systems of ethics, but does the thought experiment actually help with moral decisions? Do any imagined circumstances help with real-world moral decisions? This isn't to say that thought experiments don't have their place; shaping perspectives is still beneficial, especially when we're trying to find out the importance of something.

For example, consider this thought experiment: imagine a world without art, buildings without structure, no visual communication, no paintings to marvel at. Doesn't that feel sad? This thought experiment shows just how important and valuable art is. It's why paintings sell for millions of dollars.

And thanks to our sponsor for today's video, Masterworks. You too can start investing in securitized Blue Chip art to get a piece of that pie. Masterworks has acquired over 300 paintings from legendary artists like Picasso and Van Gogh, and each of their 21 exited works have individually delivered a profit. This includes returns of 35%, 16%, 17%, and so on, with over $55 million paid out to investors. While things like stock prices and real estate portfolios have been volatile in the past three decades, contemporary art has remained resilient in that same period of time.

Based on Sharpe ratio figures, over 900,000 people have signed up so far, and for popular offerings, shares have sold...