I wouldn't risk 10 lives for saving one. I'd push the fat guy, or myself if that counts.

I would push the fat guy, you would be a synchro path to not do that, and kill all of you. If he's fat enough to stop the train, then his fat ass is getting pushed off.

For me it's easy. You push the guy to save 10.

JLaw wrote For me it's easy. You push the guy to save 10.

Is it so easy, to kill one maybe it's easy to say but if you really think about it happening I doubt it would be so easy.

"A runaway train is racing toward five men who are tied to the track. Unless the train is stopped, it will inevitably kill all five men. You are standing on a footbridge looking down on the unfolding disaster. However, a fat man, a stranger, is standing next to you: if you push him off the bridge, he will topple onto the line and, although he will die, his chunky body will stop the train, saving five lives. Would you kill the fat man?

The question may seem bizarre. But it's one variation of a puzzle that has baffled moral philosophers for almost half a century and that more recently has come to preoccupy neuroscientists, psychologists, and other thinkers as well. In this book, David Edmonds, coauthor of the best-selling Wittgenstein's Poker, tells the riveting story of why and how philosophers have struggled with this ethical dilemma, sometimes called the trolley problem. In the process, he provides an entertaining and informative tour through the history of moral philosophy. Most people feel it's wrong to kill the fat man. But why? After all, in taking one life you could save five. As Edmonds shows, answering the question is far more complex--and important--than it first appears. In fact, how we answer it tells us a great deal about right and wrong.

David Edmonds is the author, with John Eidinow, of the best-selling Wittgenstein's Poker, as well as Rousseau's Dog and Bobby Fischer Goes to War. The cofounder of the popular Philosophy Bites podcast series, Edmonds is a senior research associate at the University of Oxford's Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics and a multi-award-winning radio feature maker at the BBC. He holds a PhD in philosophy.

Review:

"A lucid account of a famous thought experiment in moral philosophy."--Editors' Choice, New York Times Book Review

"[J]aunty, lucid and concise. . . . In Would You Kill the Fat Man? David Edmonds . . . a seasoned philosopher, tells the story . . . with wit and panache."--Sarah Bakewell, New York Times Book Review

"David Edmonds's vastly more ambitious Would You Kill the Fat Man? has the cartoons--and just about everything else you could want in a thoughtful popular treatment of [the trolley problem]. A marvel of economy and learning worn lightly, Mr. Edmonds's book ranges pleasurably back to Aquinas and forward into the future of robots, who will of course need an ethics just as much as people do. Perhaps best of all, Mr. Edmonds recognizes that the origins of 'trolleyology' are at least as interesting as the many philosophical writings, academic exercises and parlor games that have sprung from the original trolley paper, published in 1967 by an English philosopher named Philippa Foot."--Daniel Akst, Wall Street Journal

"An accessible, humorous examination of how people approach complex ethical dilemmas. . . . Written for general readers, the book captures the complexities underpinning difficult decisions."--Publishers Weekly"

Push the guy save ten people.

Guffaw wrote Push the guy save ten people.

Really, just think about it...................

Trigrous1 wrote

Guffaw wrote Push the guy save ten people.

Really, just think about it...................

Think about what? The fact that the fat guy in reality could not stop a train? Either way, in this situation lives would be lost. I don't see the reasoning behind this "Psychopath test". A psychopath: A person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse. Anyone in this situation would have some kind of remorse. A psychopath would most likely push the fat guy over the wrong side of the bridge, so he and the 10 people would die while he walks away like nothing happened. Everyone who says save the ten people even if it means not saving one, shows they have sympathy for the ten people. This post is down right awkward.

Found a video just now, [ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
Ive had this discussion in one of the best Swedish school, and it wasn't awkward.

Trigrous1 wrote Found a video just now, [ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
Ive had this discussion in one of the best Swedish school, and it wasn't awkward.

A verbal discussion is much different than an internet post. Its still an awkward topic, because either way you're confusing the posters.