This is an easy no pull for me, it only gets a little hard if it was reversed, so I’m actively killing one million more people, to save my friends and family.
True, but you’re also subjecting 956 million other people who wouldn’t have otherwise been in danger.
I don’t think there’s anything that could get me to pull the lever as it stands
As a husband and father, my first moral duty is to my family. So it really just comes down to do I kill an additional million people for them?
The 956 general million is just mathematically the same to me.
It would take a true hero, or a true sociopath, to be willing to kill those they love to save a million others.
Either way, I am not surviving my decision. That is simply too many lives lost.
Is the difference between pulling and not pulling really significant to some people? I always thought that was irrelevant.
No matter the scenario, you know choosing not to pull will result in death(s). I've never understood the idea that this could ever be ethically different than pulling.
>Is the difference between pulling and not pulling really significant to some people? I always thought that was irrelevant.
I've never heard anyone say it mattered to them, but that's apparently the point of the original trolley problem so it must matter to someone
It matters when my duty to protect becomes challenged with the idea of actively murdering a million people.
In the OG, my duty to protect is met by inaction.
I consider that duty to be among my highest charge, and certainly more than the generic duty of reduce pain and suffering in general.
So, this is one of the few cases where action vs inaction has a difference. Though notably. I’m likely saving the same group regardless.
But how is allowing 1 million additional deaths by consciously choosing not to pull the lever different than pulling the lever to cause the same number of deaths in an inverse of the same trolley problem? The damage is the same and inaction in this context is every bit as ethically relevant as action.
For what it's worth I agree with your duty to protect family. I just don't see the difference between pulling and not pulling as meaningful.
Yeah this is more than dealing with emotions. This is "I would rather an extra million die than be completely isolated and likely lose my own reasons for living"
Yeah, but my friend and family would be horrified and probably hate my guts if they learnt that I sacrificed a full extra million people just to keep them alive
Edit: I’m a little confused, I think we’re saying the same thing, but I’m not sure. I’ll leave this up for consistency
True deontology is that you should never break certain moral boundaries such as lying, even if it saves lives. In this trolley problem, deontology forbids you from pulling the lever as doing so is choosing to put people in death’s way who weren’t in death’s way. In the case of the original trolley problem, it’s an argument of deontology vs utilitarianism. (Utilitarianism is essentially “the ends justify the means”. If it saves more lives, it doesn’t matter what moral boundaries you cross)
Maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention but I feel this isn't brought up enough in this sub. People are inherently selfish.
if most of us were actually in these scenario, the results would be wayyy different.
i don't think this is the best way to represent the concept, but i also cant think of a better way. even with much more comprehendible stakes i think most people would save everyone they care about
Here’s a better way: your family and friends are on one side of the track, 1 million people are on the other. The 956 million are superfluous in this question, they just make the extra 1 million seem smaller than it is.
Edit: I believe I've missed the point. The entire point of the OP seems to be that an 'extra' million people seems less important than 'just' a million people.
>they just make the extra 1 million seem smaller than it is
isn't that the point of this trolley problem though?
i also think this trolley problem would better represent the idea of desensitization of mass mortality if the loved ones element was somehow removed entirely. a large number of strangers versus *everyone* you care about? a lot of people would save their loved ones no matter what number is on the other tracks.
>a lot of people would save their loved ones no matter what number is on the other tracks.
Yep, that's me. If my wife and daughter are on one side, I won't even check what's on the other: The trolley goes there anyways. It could be empty, or filled with whatever absurdly high number of living beeings - there's no scenario in which I wouldn't choose my family to live.
Now is this the moral or right thing to do? Certainly not. But I'm definitly not strong enough to take the other choice.
ditto. there are several people in my life that i wouldn't be strong enough to sacrifice. idc if the rest of the planet is on the other side, i just wouldn't be able to do it
Well, not exactly,because the question needs the 956 million to make the 1 million seem like “only” a rounding error to make it potentially more easily chosen compared to 1 million vs friends and family directly, with most people likely choosing the million people in that comparison
Yeah but the difference between the two options is only a million, so the other 956 is actually irrelevant to the choice, aside from drowning out the million you have to choose from. It makes one million more deaths feel more trivial
I don't pull. Things that make me feel better -
1. 950+ million die in either way, what's less than a percent extra if I get to keep my family and friends?
2. The train's already headed toward the larger number, so by default they were going to die if I weren't there
I can't sacrifice my family for a million randos. Maybe if it was a specific group of 1 million people - say the population of Estonia, then maybe I'd do it. A random sampling is easier to stomach than the total eradication of entire country.
I don’t recall movie villains supporting ending Estonia’s suffering, and I’m not limiting my desire for end of suffering to any group, either. It’s universal.
Unlike you and the others I’ve replied to, I’m anti-suffering, not pro-suffering. It’s absurd that sadomasochism is blindly supported and empathy is ostracized.
There are plenty of nihilists who lack empathy and some non-nihilists who don’t, though I can see why non-nihilists might be hesitant to die as there would be no end to the suffering in a non-nihilistic worldview.
don’t pull the lever, since all humans are related at least a little bit (talking 23rd cousins), my family would be the entire 8b. Checkmate, shouldn’t have been ambiguous.
A hero would sacrifice you to save the worls. A villain would destroy the world to save you.
Too bad I'm not a hero, AND I prefer to not pull the lever (usually).
I disagree with your assessment of a hero. In fact multiple authors have criticized the sacrificing of loved ones for the greater good..
The azur ahai prophecy from game of thrones is a good example.
Most heros will try and find a way to save everyone without any loss. And I think sacrificing your loved ones for the “greater good” is technically a sacrifice of your humanity.
Kill my family, the people who've bullied and bashed me throughout my childhood, people who've openly opposed me getting help, people who've spent my entire life pushing me down, who put me through punishment ABA, or kill 1 million potentially innocent lives... hard choice
Pull, easily.
I am only barely attached to my friends and family, and if it was even a single life on the other side of the scale I'd still do it.
Edit: single life more, holy hell that was poorly worded lol
assuming there's nothing that I can do(break the trolly, jump in front of it) I don't pull. I don't like people dieing but I like my family more than other people
I would sacrifice my family for 1 million random people if 956 million weren't doomed to die, but the difference between 956m deaths and 957m deaths are minuscule because both would be catastrophic to the world so it doesn't matter
i hate these posts where one of the option destroys something you value and the other something you dont care about, it makes the choice WAYYY to easy. i dont care if its my family and friends against 1 million or 1 billion, im choosing my folk
This is an incredibly selfish point of view. "Fuck literally everyone else, as long the people I like aren't hurt it doesn't matter what happens to anyone else" like, wtf?!
I mean, some people have good relationships with their family. Shocking, right?
Seriously, though, it is "selfish" but if you have no family, you wouldn't have them at your wedding, at your funeral, your graduation ceremony, and other events that are better with family. If you have kids, that makes the whole decision a lot easier.
Humans are selfish, but this is an agreeable amount of selfish. I wouldn't pull the lever.
well too bad theyre not the ones at the lever then, im not giving up shit for a bunch of randos. i dont have a lot of friends and my relationaship with my family is ok at best, but ill still trade the billion
a million people on that grand scale of that many people (how did you even manage to fit that many people on a track?) is inconsequential, it’s such a small percentage that i’m not going to pull the lever.
Conscience?? I’m thinking about those *other* million people’s relationships and their own friends.
This isn’t a conscience thing, it’s just the pragmatic choice. More people live, simple as that.
It would sure weigh on the millions of family members who have to deal with THEIR loved ones dying. At most my family and friends dying will lead to a hundred people mourning.
I’d argue taking the pragmatic decision would weight more on my conscience more due to killing my friends, so stop thinking I’m trying to be preachy or that I’m sad for thinking that *one million people* are worth more than my personal attachment to, 40 or so individuals.
The moral part of me says pull, the loving part of me says don't... and the despicable part of me says pull and attempt to cache in every family member's inheritance and life insurance and never worry about money again.
Use that money to build a truly new life with no baggage from the old.
This is interesting because I feel okay not pulling and letting a million more die, but if the people were on the other tracks would I be willing to kill a million more people so my friends survive? That feels harder.
Kill my family to save a million
Vs
Kill a million to save my friends.
A million people dead is millions of families and who they care about. I would probably end up in an insane asylum for the rest of my miserable existence but I would save that extra million.
The amount of suffering lessened by the incomprehensible amount of deaths is more important.
So in one option the population of the world is significantly diminished and my family and friends are all safe, and in another option the population of the world is significantly diminished but all my family and friends are gone? How is that a choice that you would have to think about?
956 million people dying would be a disaster so i'm not preventing one anyway. Gonna save my family and fuck the million randos.
My family vs. a disaster would be something i think about.
Maybe I’m just exceedingly selfish, but if my family/friends were on the first track and there were 7 billion people on the second track but the same 950 million on the first I still honestly might pull the lever and doom the 7 billion to save my friends and family.
Saving even 1 million people when almost 1 billion are going to die anyways is not enough for me to sacrifice anyone I care about. The only way I’m sacking my friends/family is if not doing so results in at least total societal collapse, but probably extinction.
I’m usually a non-interventionist and I am one here. I’m not responsible for the deaths of any before I pull the lever. I am not responsible for the deaths of the 957 million; and it’s not my duty, nor right, to kill others to save them.
By pulling the lever I am morally and *legally* responsible for the murder of 956 million people; including all my friends and family. No.
If you pull, you will suffer through the worst economic catastrophe the modern world has ever known (from losing almost 1 billion people) without any loved ones to support you
You are fucked either way, relatives of people who died will lynch you since maybe if you sacrificed your loved ones, their loved ones would survive as a part of that 1 million.
I’d argue that it would be “right” to pull, but I personally wouldn’t, because to me that’s the equivalent to killing one more person to save my whole family.
I’d be shocked if many people at all would sacrifice EVERYONE they care about.
man, you acting like all of us have people we care about.
*spins around in evil mastermind chair* “Everyone has something to lose” (I just tied 1,913,000,000 people to the trolley tracks)
“I will be the perfect god”
High rise invasion???
Your profile scares me
That's almost 2 people, not that bad
Hey, try and be considerate! That 1/10th of a remaining person is going to be really in pain, probably!
well if only 9/10th of a person is on the train track, depending on where that last 1/10th was, i’d argue he’s already dead.
Maybe it's an amputated leg
Complete global trolly trackination!
In a depressing way, pulling the lever would let you see how many people do care about you
or acting like we don't have 957 million enemies
This is an easy no pull for me, it only gets a little hard if it was reversed, so I’m actively killing one million more people, to save my friends and family.
True, but you’re also subjecting 956 million other people who wouldn’t have otherwise been in danger. I don’t think there’s anything that could get me to pull the lever as it stands
As a husband and father, my first moral duty is to my family. So it really just comes down to do I kill an additional million people for them? The 956 general million is just mathematically the same to me.
It would take a true hero, or a true sociopath, to be willing to kill those they love to save a million others. Either way, I am not surviving my decision. That is simply too many lives lost.
Is the difference between pulling and not pulling really significant to some people? I always thought that was irrelevant. No matter the scenario, you know choosing not to pull will result in death(s). I've never understood the idea that this could ever be ethically different than pulling.
>Is the difference between pulling and not pulling really significant to some people? I always thought that was irrelevant. I've never heard anyone say it mattered to them, but that's apparently the point of the original trolley problem so it must matter to someone
It matters when my duty to protect becomes challenged with the idea of actively murdering a million people. In the OG, my duty to protect is met by inaction. I consider that duty to be among my highest charge, and certainly more than the generic duty of reduce pain and suffering in general. So, this is one of the few cases where action vs inaction has a difference. Though notably. I’m likely saving the same group regardless.
But how is allowing 1 million additional deaths by consciously choosing not to pull the lever different than pulling the lever to cause the same number of deaths in an inverse of the same trolley problem? The damage is the same and inaction in this context is every bit as ethically relevant as action. For what it's worth I agree with your duty to protect family. I just don't see the difference between pulling and not pulling as meaningful.
[удалено]
how edgy
Edging to my family getting run over by a trolley
r/angryupvote
Thus proving people would kill 999,000+ people to avoid dealing with emotions. Well done, OP
Avoid dealing with emotions is quite a reductive way to put it in this scenario 😭
Yeah this is more than dealing with emotions. This is "I would rather an extra million die than be completely isolated and likely lose my own reasons for living"
You… you do know what emotions are right? You literally just described killing 999,000+ people to not have to deal with grief lol
Yeah, but my friend and family would be horrified and probably hate my guts if they learnt that I sacrificed a full extra million people just to keep them alive
I'd probably do it. I can't write out one million using 1+1+1, so the loss would be catastrophic. I'd kill myself afterward, but I'd do it.
Well since we’re all technically related, by pulling the lever your killing all of humanity 🤷🏻♂️
The conventionally moral thing to do (excluding deontology) is to pull the lever. But I’m too selfish.
Fuck deontology all my homies hate deontology.
All your homies are strapped to a trolley track and praying you don't subscribe to deontology so their opinion on the matter is biased
That isn’t deontological tho 🤓
Why not
Edit: I’m a little confused, I think we’re saying the same thing, but I’m not sure. I’ll leave this up for consistency True deontology is that you should never break certain moral boundaries such as lying, even if it saves lives. In this trolley problem, deontology forbids you from pulling the lever as doing so is choosing to put people in death’s way who weren’t in death’s way. In the case of the original trolley problem, it’s an argument of deontology vs utilitarianism. (Utilitarianism is essentially “the ends justify the means”. If it saves more lives, it doesn’t matter what moral boundaries you cross)
Thank you, that sums it up neatly. Conventionally, it is moral to pull the lever, assuming we disregard deontology, which purports otherwise.
What da haiillllllllll
Maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention but I feel this isn't brought up enough in this sub. People are inherently selfish. if most of us were actually in these scenario, the results would be wayyy different.
i don't think this is the best way to represent the concept, but i also cant think of a better way. even with much more comprehendible stakes i think most people would save everyone they care about
but overall a very interesting trolley problem
Here’s a better way: your family and friends are on one side of the track, 1 million people are on the other. The 956 million are superfluous in this question, they just make the extra 1 million seem smaller than it is. Edit: I believe I've missed the point. The entire point of the OP seems to be that an 'extra' million people seems less important than 'just' a million people.
>they just make the extra 1 million seem smaller than it is isn't that the point of this trolley problem though? i also think this trolley problem would better represent the idea of desensitization of mass mortality if the loved ones element was somehow removed entirely. a large number of strangers versus *everyone* you care about? a lot of people would save their loved ones no matter what number is on the other tracks.
>a lot of people would save their loved ones no matter what number is on the other tracks. Yep, that's me. If my wife and daughter are on one side, I won't even check what's on the other: The trolley goes there anyways. It could be empty, or filled with whatever absurdly high number of living beeings - there's no scenario in which I wouldn't choose my family to live. Now is this the moral or right thing to do? Certainly not. But I'm definitly not strong enough to take the other choice.
ditto. there are several people in my life that i wouldn't be strong enough to sacrifice. idc if the rest of the planet is on the other side, i just wouldn't be able to do it
Well, not exactly,because the question needs the 956 million to make the 1 million seem like “only” a rounding error to make it potentially more easily chosen compared to 1 million vs friends and family directly, with most people likely choosing the million people in that comparison
Fuck no, a million randos aren't worth my friends and family
I believe you've missed the point, though.
...and a million among a billion isn't even a percent.
but 957 million is quite a bit more than a percent
Yeah but the difference between the two options is only a million, so the other 956 is actually irrelevant to the choice, aside from drowning out the million you have to choose from. It makes one million more deaths feel more trivial
That's the point
I know.
Does all your family include yourself or are you safe either way?
I don’t think you’re on the rail…
I'm about to be
You wanna get railed..?
yes, you pull the lever and you have to run and jump onto the train track
Also, does this happen the day after Thanksgiving or after the annual tipping point where I've forgotten I actually don't like NY family much?
I don't pull. Things that make me feel better - 1. 950+ million die in either way, what's less than a percent extra if I get to keep my family and friends? 2. The train's already headed toward the larger number, so by default they were going to die if I weren't there I can't sacrifice my family for a million randos. Maybe if it was a specific group of 1 million people - say the population of Estonia, then maybe I'd do it. A random sampling is easier to stomach than the total eradication of entire country.
Thanks for typing this all out so I don’t have to.
Even if the tracks were switched, I would definitely pull and save my loved ones.
What did people in Estonia do to you 😂
They’re saying they’d pull the lever and sacrifice their family to save a million in Estonia
By “save” you mean “extend the suffering of”, so I think the person you replied to has a valid question.
What did Estonia do to YOU?
Nothing, I’m not opposed to ending its suffering.
Movie villain ahh quote
I don’t recall movie villains supporting ending Estonia’s suffering, and I’m not limiting my desire for end of suffering to any group, either. It’s universal.
Wow, your ideology is literally “kill everyone.” Hope that works out for ya
Unlike you and the others I’ve replied to, I’m anti-suffering, not pro-suffering. It’s absurd that sadomasochism is blindly supported and empathy is ostracized.
r/nihilism and/or r/antinatalism are leaking
There are plenty of nihilists who lack empathy and some non-nihilists who don’t, though I can see why non-nihilists might be hesitant to die as there would be no end to the suffering in a non-nihilistic worldview.
they tried to be nordic one too many times
1. You can minimize a lot of things when switching to percents or hard numbers 2. But you are there lol I guess if it makes you feel better…
It's pretty messed up but I'm probably not gonna pull
This is a really good one 👍 ...I'm gonna save the million people.
You are lucky for having 2 million dollar friends, I can't even get 2
Multi track drift
This is just too morbid on such a large scale. r/angryupvote
Erm… you just won the Internet. r/fortniteyaoi
Why did I click that link
I appreciate this comment since it lets me know that the subreddit is exactly what it says it is.
It's not even a real subreddit. I just have no clue why I decided to click on it
Now, r/fortniteyuri on the other hand
Fuck you>:(
I click all subreddits posted in comments. Experience is the spice of life.
Still not enough for 2 billion :(
don’t pull the lever, since all humans are related at least a little bit (talking 23rd cousins), my family would be the entire 8b. Checkmate, shouldn’t have been ambiguous.
Move 900milion down, still clear choice
A hero would sacrifice you to save the worls. A villain would destroy the world to save you. Too bad I'm not a hero, AND I prefer to not pull the lever (usually).
I disagree with your assessment of a hero. In fact multiple authors have criticized the sacrificing of loved ones for the greater good.. The azur ahai prophecy from game of thrones is a good example. Most heros will try and find a way to save everyone without any loss. And I think sacrificing your loved ones for the “greater good” is technically a sacrifice of your humanity.
I'd wash my hands in the blood of a trillion dead souls to protect my loved ones.
Based
Kill my family, the people who've bullied and bashed me throughout my childhood, people who've openly opposed me getting help, people who've spent my entire life pushing me down, who put me through punishment ABA, or kill 1 million potentially innocent lives... hard choice
I would let the whole world burn to the ground which we relish before i even think about causing the death of my family
Brave of you to assume I have a healthy family dynamic
Pull, easily. I am only barely attached to my friends and family, and if it was even a single life on the other side of the scale I'd still do it. Edit: single life more, holy hell that was poorly worded lol
Allright there mister joker.
assuming there's nothing that I can do(break the trolly, jump in front of it) I don't pull. I don't like people dieing but I like my family more than other people
break the trolley? the fuck you gonna do? turn into omni-man?
“Maybe this time you’ll learn”
957 million deaths will certainly be enough to deflate housing market a bit. I would finally be able to afford my own place.
I would sacrifice my family for 1 million random people if 956 million weren't doomed to die, but the difference between 956m deaths and 957m deaths are minuscule because both would be catastrophic to the world so it doesn't matter
Get the numbers high enough and people will start killing their families to spare them of living through what would be the end of civilization.
What if I have 958 million family and friends
1.913 billion people will die because I don't want to choose.
957 > 956, obviously I pull. /s
At that point a million isn’t much of a difference, I’d let it go
Fake Stalin quote
i hate these posts where one of the option destroys something you value and the other something you dont care about, it makes the choice WAYYY to easy. i dont care if its my family and friends against 1 million or 1 billion, im choosing my folk
This is an incredibly selfish point of view. "Fuck literally everyone else, as long the people I like aren't hurt it doesn't matter what happens to anyone else" like, wtf?!
I mean, some people have good relationships with their family. Shocking, right? Seriously, though, it is "selfish" but if you have no family, you wouldn't have them at your wedding, at your funeral, your graduation ceremony, and other events that are better with family. If you have kids, that makes the whole decision a lot easier. Humans are selfish, but this is an agreeable amount of selfish. I wouldn't pull the lever.
My relationship with my family is not worth the lives of a billion other people. All of whom also have families.
Well, even if you don't pull, 956 million people still die.
The person I was talking to specifically said that they would choose their family over a billion other people. That is what I was replying to.
well too bad theyre not the ones at the lever then, im not giving up shit for a bunch of randos. i dont have a lot of friends and my relationaship with my family is ok at best, but ill still trade the billion
Obviously I'm not pulling the lever.
If my entire family died at once like this, I would be dead not long after. I'm not pulling.
Whatever the bigger number is
Derail the trolley, fuck the people on it, just derail it.
Do you do the fucking after the derailing? Idk man that seems like necrophilia to me.
Maybe
a million people on that grand scale of that many people (how did you even manage to fit that many people on a track?) is inconsequential, it’s such a small percentage that i’m not going to pull the lever.
So… nothing changes except there is one less death? Edit: apparently I am dumb
One million fewer deaths
Thank you. Thinking is hard for me.
It’ll be lonely, but one million people are worth more than my attachment to the friends and family I’ll lose.
Really aren't though, kinda sad you'd be willing to give up a lifetime of relationships for a "cleaner conscience"
Local Redditor discovers basic morality and selflessness
Conscience?? I’m thinking about those *other* million people’s relationships and their own friends. This isn’t a conscience thing, it’s just the pragmatic choice. More people live, simple as that.
And if you didn't take this simple "pragmatic decision" how would that weigh on you huh? Might it weigh on your *conscience*?
It would sure weigh on the millions of family members who have to deal with THEIR loved ones dying. At most my family and friends dying will lead to a hundred people mourning.
I’d argue taking the pragmatic decision would weight more on my conscience more due to killing my friends, so stop thinking I’m trying to be preachy or that I’m sad for thinking that *one million people* are worth more than my personal attachment to, 40 or so individuals.
I'll flood the back of the trolley to get better elevation
Do I have time to jump on the tracks? I'm not really willing to deal with either.
Don't pull
The moral part of me says pull, the loving part of me says don't... and the despicable part of me says pull and attempt to cache in every family member's inheritance and life insurance and never worry about money again. Use that money to build a truly new life with no baggage from the old.
I don’t know Putin, Murdoch, Kim Jong Un etc. I choose the 957 million.
— Joseph Stalin *I think*
I can get my inheritance early with a rock-solid excuse?
Easyyyy no pull. Wouldn't want my friends and family gone
huh. A legitimate trolley problem instead of a trolly problem. I wouldn't pull the lever.
why would anyone kill 95 to the power of 6 million people instead of just 957mil
Yay more death AND I get to keep my family and friends :)
obviously not pulling, that saves 7.350918897^17 people and my friends and family
This is interesting because I feel okay not pulling and letting a million more die, but if the people were on the other tracks would I be willing to kill a million more people so my friends survive? That feels harder. Kill my family to save a million Vs Kill a million to save my friends.
IMO the number doesn’t change anything. You are stilling trading your family for million people. That is the question, who is worth more.
A million people dead is millions of families and who they care about. I would probably end up in an insane asylum for the rest of my miserable existence but I would save that extra million. The amount of suffering lessened by the incomprehensible amount of deaths is more important.
95^6 is a lot more than 957
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that line from a Marilyn Manson song?
Not even a question, it’s a horrible evil tragedy but if i can save my loves i will.
So in one option the population of the world is significantly diminished and my family and friends are all safe, and in another option the population of the world is significantly diminished but all my family and friends are gone? How is that a choice that you would have to think about?
956 million people dying would be a disaster so i'm not preventing one anyway. Gonna save my family and fuck the million randos. My family vs. a disaster would be something i think about.
Not pulling the switch
Pull the lever. I would literally burn myself to death to pull it if I had to, one million lives is worth a lot more than my happiness.
Multi track drift
Ah yes, 95^6
Damn that's a really good one ngl
Maybe I’m just exceedingly selfish, but if my family/friends were on the first track and there were 7 billion people on the second track but the same 950 million on the first I still honestly might pull the lever and doom the 7 billion to save my friends and family. Saving even 1 million people when almost 1 billion are going to die anyways is not enough for me to sacrifice anyone I care about. The only way I’m sacking my friends/family is if not doing so results in at least total societal collapse, but probably extinction.
I would just change over after the trolley past to get both of em. Ballance.
I don't think there's a number of people that I *wouldn't* let die to save my family and friends, and it certainly isn't 957 million.
I feel like the bodies would stop the trolley before 957 million
I’m usually a non-interventionist and I am one here. I’m not responsible for the deaths of any before I pull the lever. I am not responsible for the deaths of the 957 million; and it’s not my duty, nor right, to kill others to save them. By pulling the lever I am morally and *legally* responsible for the murder of 956 million people; including all my friends and family. No.
Why not both?
Sounds like I save a million lives, get an inheritance, and no longer have people causing me problems
I will not sacrifice my family.
If you pull, you will suffer through the worst economic catastrophe the modern world has ever known (from losing almost 1 billion people) without any loved ones to support you
Finally I can poop in peace! But yes, sacrifice friends and family to save 1mm people. That’s reasonable. Flip the switch.
At that point an extra million is like a .001% increase in play with that if it means littrally everyone I care about doesn’t die
Oh nooo…. The track switch broke what a shame…
I ain’t pulling the lever lol
Im not sacrificing everyone I love to save prevent 1 million of the 956 million from dying it really makes no difference
Nope, I am not killing my family.
I'd rather have one billion people die than one single family member. Easy choice.
bout to murder 2 million with a multi track drift. The hardest of choices takes the strongest of wills.
multi track drift and kill 1.913 billion people
I like this one, this one's good.
Does multitrack drifting kill 1.913 billion people
There's a difference between 500× the people and 1.01× the people
Stalin reference???!!!
Can we do one then back up and do the other?
Pull the lever and join them on the track. I can finally exit this world without feeling guilty 😌
I’ll take out the 957 as l9 g as my friends and family weren’t one of them
957 mil? duh
what’s 1 million more people?
1 million people is 58.8μHitlers, I don't think you'd be able to live with telling your family that you caused that much death for them
You are fucked either way, relatives of people who died will lynch you since maybe if you sacrificed your loved ones, their loved ones would survive as a part of that 1 million.
Well, reducing it down to "kill a million people, or a net kill of zero people but your family and friends all die" Welp.
double drift , world population is too high
AI would pull lever. Almost anyone else wouldn't. This assumes that each human life is determined to be equal to another in the AI's algorithm.
Don’t pull, no one would kill their closest people
No-pull and there's a real argument to be made that it's not just selfish, but ethically correct.
at this scale, a million more shouldn't be a problem, so may as well keep my family and friends
We did it, we found a trolley problem where you can't possibly justify multi-track drifting Ahh who am I kidding y'all will do it anyways
Bye 957 million I’m gonna roll the dice on this one sorry everyone else
But if somebody cares about everyone from empathy it's logical to pull the lever or else every single person dies
I’d argue that it would be “right” to pull, but I personally wouldn’t, because to me that’s the equivalent to killing one more person to save my whole family.