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
The Banach–Tarski Paradox
Hey, Vsauce. Michael here. There’s a famous way to seemingly create chocolate out of nothing. Maybe you’ve seen it before. This chocolate bar is 4 squares by 8 squares, but if you cut it like this and then like this and finally like this, you can rearrang…
EPIC NOSE PICKING and why Football RULES -- IMG! #20
Master Chief loves football, and the most confused face ever. It’s a special football episode of IMG North American football. It gives you everything a guy could want: kicks to the face, kicks to the nuts, and heads up your butt. You get to pick; you can …
Life After Death
We’ve had to talk about death a lot in the past few years. Whether as referring to the number of casualties in a war or as the number of victims of a virus, although we primarily discuss it within the context of our society, we understandably still keep d…
The Magic of Butterfly Scales - Part 1 - Smarter Every Day 104
Hey, it’s me Destin, welcome back to Smarter Every Day. So have you ever seen something in your life that was so incredibly beautiful that you just did not understand how it could exist in this physical world with you? And the more you get close to it, th…
Subject, direct object, and indirect object | Syntax | Khan Academy
Hello Chrome, Mary, and hello Rosie. Hi David! So, today we’re going to be talking about subject, direct object, and indirect object, identifying those within a sentence. But first, I suppose we should figure out what those things are. So, we’ve talked a…
Is Glass a Liquid?
In 1994, a massive earthquake shook the Northridge suburb of Los Angeles, killing 57 people and injuring over 5000. The cost of damages was in excess of $20 billion. It’s earthquakes like this one that make us question just how solid is the earth beneath …