The trolley problem: would you kill one person to save many others?

In the 2015 British thriller Eye in the Sky, a military team locates a terrorist cell preparing an attack expected to kill hundreds. They command a drone that can drop a bomb on the terrorists, preventing their attack. As the team readies the bomb, their cameras spy a little girl selling bread within the blast radius. Should they go through with their mission – killing the girl in order to prevent the deaths of many others?

This modern-day moral dilemma has its roots in a classic philosophical thought experiment known as the trolley problem. Introduced in 1967 by Philippa Foot, the trolley problem illuminates the landscape of moral intuitions – the peculiar and sometimes surprising patterns of how we divide right from wrong.

Consider one version of the trolley problem:
A runaway trolley is heading down the tracks toward five workers who will all be killed if the trolley proceeds on its present course. Adam is standing next to a large switch that can divert the trolley onto a different track. The only way to save the lives of the five workers is to divert the trolley onto another track that only has one worker on it. If Adam diverts the trolley onto the other track, this one worker will die, but the other five workers will be saved.
Should Adam flip the switch, killing the one worker but saving the other five?

Now consider a slightly different version:
A runaway trolley is heading down the tracks toward five workers who will all be killed if the trolley proceeds on its present course. Adam is on a footbridge over the tracks, in between the approaching trolley and the five workers. Next to him on this footbridge is a stranger who happens to be very large. The only way to save the lives of the five workers is to push this stranger off the footbridge and onto the tracks below where his large body will stop the trolley. The stranger will die if Adam does this, but the five workers will be saved.
Should Adam push the stranger off the footbridge, killing him but saving the five workers?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id=1sl5KJ69qiA;t=6

‘Vsauce, michael here’ a fantastic youtube channel…

I am not God to decide who lives or who dies. In both cases i may not intervene. But different situations may call for different actions

When you intervene it’s murder doesn’t matter who you were saving… If you don’t it’s called an act of God… Let them niggas try and say themselves.

I will probably allow nature to take it’s course. Diverting the trolley means you actually made a logical decision to murder someone.

Flip the switch.

nitaacha wagongwe …pole…
alafu nipost k talk…
alafu niweke spoiler alert…

flip it/not flip it either way ,guilty conscience creeps in,it really doesnt matter what you do at that point

pull the UK move.
sasa mnataka ninfanye nini?
[ATTACH=full]157398[/ATTACH]

I watched that movie

Don’t intervene, it’s easier on your conscience in the long run.

But hiyo ya bomb and the little girl, naendelea tu. Huyo ni collateral damage.

Btw they’re not equal situations. One is about whether to stop yourself, another is about whether to interfere with nature.

Adam should jump himself and stop the trolley if he believes that much that he must do something.

Flip the switch, no hesitation. I guess a little bit of a god complex in play

:D:D:D