yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

Philosophy's Biggest Questions


3m read
·Nov 4, 2024

Processing might take a few minutes. Refresh later.

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 "Kidney" 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 deontological 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? The trolley problem allows us to consider the interaction between ethics, psychology, and logic.

To fully appreciate thought experiments like this, you need to have a good understanding of concepts like math, probability, and science. I know these can be really difficult and expensive to learn if you take the traditional approach, but you don't have to. Thanks to Brilliant.org, the sponsor of today's episode, Brilliant is a platform that allows you to learn by doing, with thousands of interactive lessons in math, data analysis, programming, and AI.

I love Brilliant and have been using it for years because of how easy it is to start learning. Thanks to their amazing mobile app and short, fun lessons, you can learn anywhere and in any short amount of time you have. Whether you're diving into a new topic or just doing a quick practice lesson, you can level up in just a few minutes right there on your phone.

This is what I spent time doing when I would have otherwise been doom scrolling on TikTok. And it's not just easy to use; Brilliant, as a learning platform, is also designed to be uniquely effective. Their first principles approach helps you build...

More Articles

View All
Greening of Pittsburgh | Podcast | Overheard at National Geographic
Hi, I’m Davar Ardelon of Overheard, and this week we have something new for you: the story of three climate change problem solvers in the city of Pittsburgh. Today’s episode comes by way of storyteller Matt Scott of Project Drawdown. His reporting in the …
Bush Engineering | Port Protection
I’m a essentially just a run-of-the-mill bush engineer. You give me some scrap steel, I’ll figure it out. I’ll make it work guaranteed. Sam’s home and workshop are like no other. This is a homebuilt, started when I was 22. I’m not 22 anymore, thank God. B…
Probability distributions from empirical data | Probability & combinatorics
We’re told that Jada owns a restaurant where customers can make their orders using an app. She decides to offer a discount on appetizers to attract more customers, and she’s curious about the probability that a customer orders a large number of appetizers…
Frank Drake’s Cosmic Road Map | Podcast | Overheard at National Geographic
It’s Halloween 1961. Ten of the world’s leading scientists have found their way to a remote spot in the Allegheny Mountains. They’re there in secret to talk about searching for aliens. Okay, hang on, this isn’t the beginning of a Twilight Zone episode. Th…
Why Simplicity is Power | Priceless Benefits of Being Simple
Once upon a time, in a quiet mountain village lived a humble stonecutter named Taro. Every day, Taro would shape rocks into bricks and tiles. He was content with his simple life and found joy in his craft. One day, a group of wealthy merchants passed by. …
HubSpot CEO and Cofounder Brian Halligan with Wufoo Cofounder Kevin Hale
So Brian, I’ve listened to a few of your podcasts, and on one of them, you described yourself as an introvert who likes to work from home. That being said, you’ve managed a public company. How do you mess those two things together? That’s a good question…