Thanks so much for watching and if you're interested in protecting your identity online, why not try our sponsor Incogni? Just use code ExtraHistory at incogni.com/extra to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan
In CPR classes, they teach you to quickly assign duties to onlookers specifically to get around the Bystander Effect. Point your finger, make eye contact, say things like "YOU, call 911. YOU, get me an AED (either from the place you're at or a nearby business)" etc. It really works, because now there's an element of social pressure for the person to help, and as the first responder you have already 'broken the ice' in starting the helping process.
If you just shout out 'someone call 911' then you'll trigger the bystander effect, everyone will assume someone else will be calling, because there's so many people, surely someone's called already. But pointing ar a specific person tells them THEY are the ONE that's calling, not someone else. So they'll be feeling way more motivated to actually call, since there's no one else to do it, just them and their one task
You left out a huge element of the Prisoner's Dilemma - repeat games. Most societal contact doesn't happen just once, we acquire reputations for how well we interact with others. The *Iterated* Prisoner's Dilemma is where active research is ongoing in game theory, and the results are fascinating.
Real-life example of the bystander problem. I was waiting for the bus on a crowded corner. A blind man with his service dog was waiting to cross the road. Suddenly, the dog signaled to walk when the light at one of the busiest corners in my city was still green. People stood there and watched, for what felt like forever, as this man inched closer to stepping in front of a car. Someone eventually yelled, "Hey!"and immediately, a half dozen people around the man jumped forward to stop him. Two stayed beside him to lead him across the road once the light changed. I was too far to have been able to intervene, but that moment sticks out because I saw it, expected others to react, and wasn't the one who shouted to get peoples attention.
For the trolley problem, both reasonings are correct, but the second school’s conclusions are wrong. Taking one life is better than taking five, but both are lose conditions. The ultimate goal above all other goals is “everyone gets to walk home alive today”. That’s not always possible, and when you have to make a choice that’s morally wrong because there are no correct choices, it doesn’t mean that you’re morally wrong. It means that the game was unwinnable from the start.
If you think you've found an objectively correct answer to the trolley problem, you've already failed. We should be able to see that different people have different beliefs about what fundamentally makes something good or bad on a fundamental level. People even have different philosophies for how morality affects them. There's no way to come up with even a shred of evidence that can empirically show whether some ethical beliefs are more accurate than others.
@@AlixL96 I’ve never bought the claim that each person’s moral code is equally as valid as everyone else’s just because people disagree. Yes, people disagree, but that’s because some of those people are wrong. I know you don’t actually believe that morality is subjective either because if I started pointing to * specific political groups from world history * and claiming that their beliefs are “just a different but still valid perspective” you’d be mad as hell, and rightfully so. The moment you try to claim that morality isn’t objective to excuse your beliefs on what is good, you cease to be able to call anything objectively evil. There are definitely people that deserve to be called out as objectively evil, but you can’t do that if morality isn’t objective.
Exactly. The death of a single person and the burden it'll put on your conscience is easily the sacrifice to make. Ignoring the choice and letting the trolley kill five people may keep your conscience clean for a time, but only if you're a monster (or just incredibly numb to emotions). If you're a sane person you'll eventually end up the same mental place anyways, but with four more lives on your conscience instead of just the one. The needs of the many.
Inaction is a choice. Now, I would scream and yell to try and get that one person off the tracks, but I would still choose to save the five. Also, thank you for the bit on imposter syndrome. I needed that reminder
In reality I think the best answer to the Trolley Problem is to Kobayashi Maru it, when faced with an unwinnable situation instead do your best to alter the situation into something that is winnable.
The Trolley problem in Life is Strange made me realise that I will save whoever I'm most emotionally invested in, even if the whole town is on the chopping block.
The trolley problem also allies to game development since there tend to be several conflicting systems/mechanics that divide the player base (PvP vs. PvE, or the loud minority of a player base vs. the quiet majorities, examples of these arguments can be found on various Steam discussion areas)
In SWTOR there was a trolley problem in the Republic Commando Quest Line. One of the romanceable characters for male PCs, later in the quest line is trapped in a space station where you are trying to save a group of hostages. I had built her into my characters family tree as the mother of one of my other characters, (with my commando as the dad) do I was torn on this one and accepted the dark side points to rescue her. *Since apparently the hostages once released had to be hand held to get to your ship.)
I was told often as a kid that not all calls for help are real. That some people will act like they need help but will either jump the person who helps or have a group hidden to jump them. That has scared me into not sure if to help because being a short woman and would look like an easy target.
I think part of the problem with the trolley problem is that it doesn’t consider the other people on the track. Would the one person feel guilty that 5 other people had to die for them to live? Would the 5? What about the situations where it’s a friend/family member- would they resent you for choosing them over the strangers or not choosing them?
I feel like a mistake people often make with things like the trolley problem is that they approach them like a problem to be solved, when they actually are ciphers for understanding/testing ethical systems. For instance, the way we ask the question can change its answer for people - if instead of pulling a lever to switch the rails, what if you had to physically push someone in the way of the train to stop it? Would that change your answer, and if so, why? Yeah, it's a contrived situation, but that's on purpose.
I remember watching each of these. I remember when the recording about imposter syndrome first came up. I was already on board with you, but I hadn’t yet experienced it. I did two weeks ago. Matt, you’re doing amazing! You’re a great performer.
I believe the channel Wisecrack (great philosophy channel!) mentioned that Foote actually developed the problem to argue against the doctrine of double effect, which holds that an action with a bad outcome can still be moral if the outcome is foreseen but not intended.
I remember going through this in ethics class. I always choose one. Even when they ramped it up to people to me, or a when they said I was headed to my own doom off a cliff. Was called a psychopath at times, but the thought was always about minimizing loss. 1 life painful, but more lives on your conscience would just be unbearable. Once they start saying things like, "All five dudes are Hilter," then the problem starts to lose meaning. We aren't talking about what is the right or wrong choice anymore, but who is good or bad.
Trolley problem, attempt multi-track drifting or trust their self-preservation to get off the track. The prisoner dilemma is a question of trust, can you trust the deal to be true, can you trust the other to not betray you.
I love that some people choose to send the train to the bigger number of people because they assume there's a better chance of someone noticing the danger and saving everyone
KSP is very important to game psychology, at least for me. I always spread out my Kerbals for routine missions, hoping that the public appreciates everyone, while bigger missions are done with Jeb, Bill, Bob and Val to help shine a spotlight on the OGs.
Did you see the series where they had a variety of AIs play the prisoner's dilemma? I think the only one that won consistently was nice until backcrossed and then never forgave.
One "trolley problem" situation that happens at rapid rates in FPS is the simple revive mechanic. Because in a lot of cases, they can't be saved. They're right under the enemy's nose. In open areas, being actively sprayed at. However, you winning on your own is less likely than you and a bud winning. So then you gotta think, do I risk it? Or do I let him die and fight on my own?
Chapter 1: I'd pull the emergency brake. Chapter 2: Always Cooperation. No matter what. Watching myself in the mirror without guilt is more worth then anything else. Chapter 3: Help or call help (dialing 911). Did the same in MMO's as Healer, sparing a heal on someone else isn't really an issue. Chapter 4: ... ugh.... XD
The funny thing in my opinion, is that I was getting in to "the good place" the series at the exact moment this was uploaded I guess God/life itself want me to watch the full series.:)
Obviously with the trolley problem (outside version), you just turn away from the tied-down victims, let the trolley go through, and then pull the lever after it passes so the next trolley goes through on the other track. Thus, everyone on both sides is treated equally and fairly in the end.
i'm weirdly observant and vigilant. i've helped several people that tripped and fell, or were sick and crying, struggling. i don't wait, i just go forward. i've been in situations where someone was there to help me and i know how relieving it is to be saved that way.
In DAYZ when you come across another play it is in both player’s best interests to work together 90% of the time, but this rarely happens, because the other player is a threat to you, and you are a threat to them, by killing you they eliminate a potential threat and steal your weapons and food.
The Trolley problem does not have enough data to produce a meaningful answer. My Solution was to De-rail the train by rapidly switching the junction. forcing one half of the train to take a different track. causing it to crash.
One game that gave me a prime example of this scenario is from the most wanted mission from Batman. Arkham Knight called shadow war. In the mission, we learn that Ra’s al Ghul had survived his fatal fall from Batman Arkham city and there is a Civil War that is going on within the league of assassins and Ra’s is connected to a machine that is giving him Lazarus chemicals, which are barely keeping him alive as Batman you were told that the rebel faction has found a purer source of chemicals and when you find these chemicals and fight against the rebel faction whom you learn it’s leader is Ra’s other daughter Nyssa who urges you to go back and destroy the machine that Ra’s is connected to and let him die. It definitely brings into perspective, Batman’s moral stance on killing because there is the concern that if Ra’s is restored to full health. There is no telling what he may do or whom he may hurt, but there is the fact that if you choose to let him die, then it is essentially breaking the code that Batman is known for. I have done both endings and they are quite interesting because if you choose to give him the cure, he will kill his daughter and escape and the rebel faction will flee and war will be averted for the time being, however if you choose to destroy the Lazarus machine When Nyssa shows up to kill her father Batman says that he will take him to the police and realizing that he would only have anywhere from only a few hours to possibly only a few days left to live she agrees, and she knows that the loyalist will scatter, and she will assume control of the league and swear off any incursions against Gotham and even Bat man leaves Ra’s in a police infirmary he weakly tells Batman “Proud of You”. I always found that mission to be very interesting and you can’t feel wrong either way
About the trolley problem. If you're forcefully put in a lose-lose situation, you can do your best to mitigate the outcome, but the responsibility is of the person that set you up.
I think fake it til you make it is the problem. Ask for help. Admit to your insecurities. Raise people up by helping them realize that no one is perfect
Watched the impostor syndrome part while I was trying to animate (I'm still learning and I put myself down most of the time) and... Wow that hit HARD....
One thing that may help to aliviate imposter syndrome over time is to actually take time to celebrate your accomplishments. It sounds silly on the face of it, but celebrating small accomplishments makes them stand out more and makes the bigger ones feel earned. If you only try celebrating the big ones, it can feel awkward and uncomfortable, however, if you make a point of celebrating the small ones, acknowledging the big ones gets easier as you have more practice. Also, celebrations can be small, like sharing a glass/cup of your beverage of choice with a friend/loved one can be an excellent way to celebrate getting this part of the project done on time. The important thing is to acknowledge it verbally and with intention. This is something we really don't do enough nowadays 😞
Troll problem: Patrol areas the most often targeted in your limited time frame or target a little of everything You cannot be everywhere, so focus on the most at risk or half heartedly do some of everything
New Vegas had a solid one in Vault 34. Save 3 people trapped in the vault while dooming the share cropper farm which denies food to thousands in need, or let them die in the vault and restore the water supply.
As a Medic main in tf2, it’s hard to say if I do this trolley problem, because it does lead to either stay or leave the fight if it gets to heated, to heal the one member on the defense, or provide healing to some that are in the cart. To be defending the point, or leave the others to their own devices, its thing like these that keeps my mind occupied and makes me question my morality
Yeah the imposter Syndrome was really hard in my uni time. I thought working with someone else (instead of my usual programming group) would be good for me. But I held that person in really high regards. So when working together it was kinda hard. But later we found out that he actually thought the same about me. Because we didn't want to fail each other we basically prosponed our work for a long time. But when we knew about it from each other we were able to create something "acceptable" in just 2 weeks. We had 20 weeks for it. If we knew earlier our project would've been great.
I tend to be very critical of the Trolley Problem because it trains people to think in binaries, deliberately disqualifying alternative solutions when creative thinking tends to lead to the best solution for most problems. You can have cake and eat it if you learn how to bake.
*The following are the musings of a Salty SEAGULL named EARL who just shows up in my posts whenever he feels like it!* [EARL the Salty SEAGULL:] "Ah, the trolley problem, a classic conundrum that has challenged many a Philosoraptor (I should know I was a Philosoraptor in a past life)! Still I prefer out of the box answers like PUNCH the TRAIN either off the TRACKs entirely or from the front! Still that kind of scenario really only works if you have the strength to actually punch the trolley and can produce enough force to stop it, so unless your Goku or Saitama the trolley is going to run right over you, but at least you still tried to make a decision where you can die with a clean conscience!"
nash equilibrium is worth a talk: my issue with it and the prisoner's dilemma is assumptions. Two people engaged in a crime together would likely have prior discussions about getting caught. At that point, they could logically assume their partner would NOT betray them, so the most logical answer in self-service, is stay quiet and take the one year. You can add in that people engaging in crime would likely have certain personalities, in a real world situation time will not stop so long-term consequences must be measured like not snitching and earning respect for it/snitching and being hunted, etc.
I actually had this happen to me in XCOM. My team was deployed to a city with rampaging aliens, with the objective to save as many civilians as possible. The near end of a turn played out such that my only remaining move was deciding what to do with a soldier armed with a rocket launcher, and ahead of me, 4 nasty but wounded aliens were pressing in on one civilian. If I let them go, on their turn one of them would kill the civilian and the rest would scatter and go after other nearby civilian targets. But man, that grouping was too juicy. I had the soldier aim the rocket directly at the civilian and obliterated it, along with the 4 aliens. That civvie was realistically dead either way, but I stopped potentially an extra 3 deaths by taking out the multiple targets all in one. I still refer to that incident as the "XCOM Trolley Problem" and would do it all the same given the chance. Sorry bud lol
You always heal the tank, if everyone is playing their role properly the dps should only be taking minimal damage anyway. If the mage died its because they were standing somewhere stupid or the tank isn’t properly maintaining aggro.
Many many husbands that make hard selfless choices to value and take care of their families suffer deeply from imposter syndrome. Tomorrow is Father’s Day. Many many many men will be told tomorrow by kids, wives and others “you’re a great dad!” Many of them will force a smile and say thanks while feeling entirely inadequate for the praise no matter how selfless and wonderful they have done. Tomorrow remember to tell dads they are wonderful but also remember to act all the other days like they are valued in-spite of the flaws they see in themselves.
My favorite trolley problem in gaming comes in InFamous when you’re forced to choose between saving your girlfriend Tish, who’s a nurse, or five doctors. It fits perfectly in the karma system of the game where it’s framed as choosing Tish is the InFamous option and the doctors is the Heroic option. But if you do choose to save Tish? PSYCH!!! The dastardly evil Kessler knew you would do that and so Tish is actually with four other doctors and you just saved a random civilian.
To heal the tank or the mage is an easy one, assuming that there are no other healers involved... You heal the tank, because when the tank dies, the mage dies too, unless the mage is especially good at kiting, and the boss is nearly dead anyways, OR, if the tank has very high survivability. Then, sometimes, everyone is going to die, and you just decide that "nobody dies today" and somehow pull it off, gaining the admiration of a random group of heroes who sing your praises as you gulp down some water after the fight is over.
I really liked the *SPOILERS FOR TRIANGLE STRATGEY* Choice of weather or not to give up Roland when the Kingdom is taken over. For context, early in the game, the king is killed and an invading force kills all of the royal family except your friend Roland, the new crown prince. You little domain is threatened and either you need to fight against near impossible odds to protect him, or give him up and keep your domain safe for now until you can fight back later. There is a couple aspects of this I like, for one Roland weighs in on the decision making, and offers himself up as sacrifice. This adds a new level of depth, because imagine if the one person on the tracks told you to give up his life, which i have not seen in a trolley problem before. Secondly, its the way the question is posed. When I played, I voted to save Roland. Not because of the friend ship him and your character had, but because in my head "It will be a lot easier/more affective to restore the throne later/revolt if we have an actual crown prince to take the throne back". That isn't how the story went nor do I think that is an option or was even brought up as an idea from the game, but the fact that there were so many angles and ideas to consider that even I was trying to reason out what to do outside of what was planned/offered as the reasonings in the game, really stuck with me.
If you view Nash as optimal, it means you forgot to internalize the externals. Staying quiet is optimal over infinate itterations. Due to punishment feedback stratagies.
The Trolley Problem: One of the less spoken of factors in the trolley problem is expected expertise and responsibility. (I am not a surgeon) Should a non-cardiologist surgeon attempt heart surgery? In most circumstances, no. A surgeon may attempt to stabilize a patient until a specialist can arrive if time is of the essence. What if a specialist, cannot arrive? The surgeon may be the patient's best shot at survival, so you can argue the surgeon should attempt to save their life. What if there are other patients they can treat who are also need surgery ASAP? The surgeon would be practicing outside their scope of practice while they were needed elsewhere, not justifiable. What if the other patients were not in urgent need of surgical intervention? Grey area; however, what if one of their patients suddenly requires urgent care while working on the other patient's heart? The morality around a lot of individual circumstances also factors in expectations and responsibilities on the individual making the decision. I wouldn't be surprised if this contributes to the bystander effect, as briefly mentioned in that section. You might just assume someone else is more qualified to give meaningful help, whereas on your own, you're absolutely their best bet.
Ok, on the topic of tackling clate change in reguards to the prisoners dilemma, no one ever said you had to stop using fossil fuels immediately. The best course of action is to use the fossile fuels while continuing to develop renewables such as nuclear and hydropower. You will have a lot more money for research if you aren't spending most of your budget on eliminating the power discrepancy between renewables and coal.
I loathe the trolly problem. It ignores the principal fail safe engineering. It's also a poor understanding of what it is to sacrifice and why you do it. The ONLY solution to the trolley problem is multi track drifting. The prisoner's dilemma should seek legal advice before saying/doing anything. Also NEVER be a bystander. Do something, even if that means just calling for help to bring in the professionals. Do a first aid course. Because if it was your loved one in need, you'd hope others would do the same.
The troley problem doesn't have an answer, maybe... but the car one does. Can the peson inside the car save themselves? almost certainly not, they are strapped in and moving at very high speeds. The person outisde the car can jump away, or react in some way to not get hurt. autonomous cars are not trolley problems, they are minimization problems where you MUST consider the probability that someone can save themselves
Personally, I would not step into a car that could decide to sacrifice me for the greater good. Not because it would be the wrong choice, but because I don't like the idea of getting sacrificed.
There are many ways in which these problems illustrate elements of their moral issues, and while distilling the problem to isolate the dilemma, it departs from reality because there are commonly more factors in play. In the case of the trolley, if you know the singular person on the one side and dislike them, how does your response change? How many people need to be in the one side for it to balance? And what if instead the singular person was someone you loved? How many would you kill for that person? In the prisoners' dilemma, they absolutely leave out relationships of those involved and those without. Say that you're estranged brothers and if your brother gets out he is going to commit matricide, are you now ready to talk, even if you will be ostracized or potentially murdered? The questions are meant to draw out a point and show it to you... what do you care about? How do you feel about that?
Pathologic and Pathologic 2 had prenominal examples of the trolley problem. Do you risk your life to save an abandoned baby? What if that baby is sick with the plague? But you're the only doctor around, and you know that baby might not survive. If you die, the town could die. Or not. While you're at it, should you steal from a starving family to give yourself a better chance at survival? People are depending on you, after all.
Fake it until you make it can be an effective short term fix. Even with depression or anxiety, going in front of a mirror and cracking the most ridiculous smile at yourself, and not stopping until you have to, will make you feel better afterward for a period of time. This is not a fix for chronic conditions, but bad days or emergencies, it can help. Also, people won't bother you as much the rest of the day when they come in the public restroom and see you smiling at yourself in the mirror like a lunatic.
The Trolley problem only exists in philosophy and video games not in real life, because real life always has dozens if not hundreds of solutions to any given problem. The solution to the Trolley is very very simple, pull the lever half way which will result in the Trolley derailing and hitting no one. For every imaginary Kobayashi Maru, there is a hacked third option available. It becomes more a test of how imaginative someone is or how good someone's creative problem solving is.
The point is about greater good vs personal culpability. This comes up every single day when designing roadways that go through neighborhoods, cutting budgets to keep a hospital running, even autonomous vehicle development and EV batteries. Also, in your example, derailing the trolley would almost certainly kill everyone on board. You just added a track, puddlebrain.
@@weetdirt No it's to trick people into thinking in false dichotomy. This is highlighted by all the conditions attached "you can only do X or Y", the freedom of choice being taken away. There is always a third option.
I’d activate it at either half a second or 1.5 seconds away from meeting the junction (depends on the model) this would cause the trolly to go straight derailing it and only bad ending myself (if I was on it) or nobody
I would argue that every scenario in these philosophical exercises are overly simplistic and lack sufficient context. I'm constantly asking for clarification and further details. However, imposter syndrome is something I deal with frequently. I'm in my 40s and well into my career and I'm always feeling insufficient and undeserving of the praise and rewards I receive. I usually manage it by not thinking about it but it's brutal at times.
I've an unusual view on the trolley problem. If you pull the lever, you killed, so your responsible for two dead (yourself is one of the two), so inaction adds 3 deaths. This means pulling the lever, and shoving the fat man are the same to me.
In the trolley problem, I'd choose to save 1 and let the 5 die, viewing life as a competition. Good and bad are relative; eliminating those 5 people might mean fewer competitors for me, which is advantageous for my own survival. If it were my baby on the other track, I'd save my baby over 5 strangers. Those 5 lives may be valuable in general, but they hold no personal significance to me. Unless saving those 5 people made me feel like a better person or had some other personal benefit, my choice would be to save those who matter to me. In essence, I'd prioritize those who add value to my life or whom I care about, over strangers who don't impact me directly.
![[MV] A leap of faith...ความเชื่อใจครั้งสุดท้าย (From "Petrichor the series")](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U1piZH2CNXA/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks so much for watching and if you're interested in protecting your identity online, why not try our sponsor Incogni? Just use code ExtraHistory at incogni.com/extra to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan
You guys are the Best ❤❤❤😊😊
Multi-track Drifting is a fundamental part of the Trolley Problem.
as gamer one must account for the maximun dps posible when dealing with the Trolley Problem
I wonder if do you get an achievement for it?
In CPR classes, they teach you to quickly assign duties to onlookers specifically to get around the Bystander Effect. Point your finger, make eye contact, say things like "YOU, call 911. YOU, get me an AED (either from the place you're at or a nearby business)" etc. It really works, because now there's an element of social pressure for the person to help, and as the first responder you have already 'broken the ice' in starting the helping process.
I remember learning that!
If you just shout out 'someone call 911' then you'll trigger the bystander effect, everyone will assume someone else will be calling, because there's so many people, surely someone's called already.
But pointing ar a specific person tells them THEY are the ONE that's calling, not someone else. So they'll be feeling way more motivated to actually call, since there's no one else to do it, just them and their one task
You left out a huge element of the Prisoner's Dilemma - repeat games. Most societal contact doesn't happen just once, we acquire reputations for how well we interact with others. The *Iterated* Prisoner's Dilemma is where active research is ongoing in game theory, and the results are fascinating.
Veritasium did a whole video on this btw
Real-life example of the bystander problem. I was waiting for the bus on a crowded corner. A blind man with his service dog was waiting to cross the road. Suddenly, the dog signaled to walk when the light at one of the busiest corners in my city was still green.
People stood there and watched, for what felt like forever, as this man inched closer to stepping in front of a car.
Someone eventually yelled, "Hey!"and immediately, a half dozen people around the man jumped forward to stop him. Two stayed beside him to lead him across the road once the light changed.
I was too far to have been able to intervene, but that moment sticks out because I saw it, expected others to react, and wasn't the one who shouted to get peoples attention.
For the trolley problem, both reasonings are correct, but the second school’s conclusions are wrong. Taking one life is better than taking five, but both are lose conditions. The ultimate goal above all other goals is “everyone gets to walk home alive today”. That’s not always possible, and when you have to make a choice that’s morally wrong because there are no correct choices, it doesn’t mean that you’re morally wrong. It means that the game was unwinnable from the start.
When he mentioned the doctor having to make that choice. I went, They always do. At least trauma surgeons do. It is called Triage.
With you on this one. Rather than just make the hard choice, we need to ask why the situation got so bad they were needed to be made
@@athenabrown3117really doesn't relate when you think abt it, idk why you used this quote
If you think you've found an objectively correct answer to the trolley problem, you've already failed. We should be able to see that different people have different beliefs about what fundamentally makes something good or bad on a fundamental level. People even have different philosophies for how morality affects them. There's no way to come up with even a shred of evidence that can empirically show whether some ethical beliefs are more accurate than others.
@@AlixL96 I’ve never bought the claim that each person’s moral code is equally as valid as everyone else’s just because people disagree. Yes, people disagree, but that’s because some of those people are wrong. I know you don’t actually believe that morality is subjective either because if I started pointing to * specific political groups from world history * and claiming that their beliefs are “just a different but still valid perspective” you’d be mad as hell, and rightfully so.
The moment you try to claim that morality isn’t objective to excuse your beliefs on what is good, you cease to be able to call anything objectively evil. There are definitely people that deserve to be called out as objectively evil, but you can’t do that if morality isn’t objective.
Inaction is an action. You're always responsible for the outcome no matter the initial state of the problem.
Under the assumption you _can_ do something, and there are decisions that can be made.
@@MaxIzrin You don't know what's possible until you attempt it.
Neutrality is the foolish idea you can benefit from evil without becoming it's next victim.
Exactly. The death of a single person and the burden it'll put on your conscience is easily the sacrifice to make. Ignoring the choice and letting the trolley kill five people may keep your conscience clean for a time, but only if you're a monster (or just incredibly numb to emotions). If you're a sane person you'll eventually end up the same mental place anyways, but with four more lives on your conscience instead of just the one.
The needs of the many.
I strongly disagree. The word even does. In-action means non-action.
In MMOs the choice is easy - I heal whoever didn't piss me off recently.
Fair enough, healing no one is a choice.
Inaction is a choice. Now, I would scream and yell to try and get that one person off the tracks, but I would still choose to save the five.
Also, thank you for the bit on imposter syndrome. I needed that reminder
To quote a line from the Rush song "Freewill": If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
In reality I think the best answer to the Trolley Problem is to Kobayashi Maru it, when faced with an unwinnable situation instead do your best to alter the situation into something that is winnable.
The Trolley problem in Life is Strange made me realise that I will save whoever I'm most emotionally invested in, even if the whole town is on the chopping block.
The trolley problem also allies to game development since there tend to be several conflicting systems/mechanics that divide the player base (PvP vs. PvE, or the loud minority of a player base vs. the quiet majorities, examples of these arguments can be found on various Steam discussion areas)
In SWTOR there was a trolley problem in the Republic Commando Quest Line. One of the romanceable characters for male PCs, later in the quest line is trapped in a space station where you are trying to save a group of hostages.
I had built her into my characters family tree as the mother of one of my other characters, (with my commando as the dad) do I was torn on this one and accepted the dark side points to rescue her. *Since apparently the hostages once released had to be hand held to get to your ship.)
Worst part about having Imposter Syndrome is when you have to deal with "your betters" that suffer from the Dunning Kruger Effect.
I was told often as a kid that not all calls for help are real. That some people will act like they need help but will either jump the person who helps or have a group hidden to jump them. That has scared me into not sure if to help because being a short woman and would look like an easy target.
I think part of the problem with the trolley problem is that it doesn’t consider the other people on the track. Would the one person feel guilty that 5 other people had to die for them to live? Would the 5? What about the situations where it’s a friend/family member- would they resent you for choosing them over the strangers or not choosing them?
I feel like a mistake people often make with things like the trolley problem is that they approach them like a problem to be solved, when they actually are ciphers for understanding/testing ethical systems. For instance, the way we ask the question can change its answer for people - if instead of pulling a lever to switch the rails, what if you had to physically push someone in the way of the train to stop it? Would that change your answer, and if so, why? Yeah, it's a contrived situation, but that's on purpose.
1. Is there a Multi-Track Drifting option?
2. I require healing....I need healing...I require healing...
3. I need healing...but im in a crowd
I remember watching each of these.
I remember when the recording about imposter syndrome first came up. I was already on board with you, but I hadn’t yet experienced it.
I did two weeks ago.
Matt, you’re doing amazing! You’re a great performer.
I heard philosophers hate the trolley problem because it distorts the actual issue and oversimplifies things.
I believe the channel Wisecrack (great philosophy channel!) mentioned that Foote actually developed the problem to argue against the doctrine of double effect, which holds that an action with a bad outcome can still be moral if the outcome is foreseen but not intended.
To solve the trolley problem logically is to pull the lever when the trolley on the intersection so it goes of track
I remember going through this in ethics class. I always choose one. Even when they ramped it up to people to me, or a when they said I was headed to my own doom off a cliff. Was called a psychopath at times, but the thought was always about minimizing loss. 1 life painful, but more lives on your conscience would just be unbearable. Once they start saying things like, "All five dudes are Hilter," then the problem starts to lose meaning. We aren't talking about what is the right or wrong choice anymore, but who is good or bad.
YES I NEEDED THIS, I'm so glad there's a compilation for EC aswell, hope to see more in the future! ❤
Happy to say we're working on more for the future!
Trolley problem, attempt multi-track drifting or trust their self-preservation to get off the track.
The prisoner dilemma is a question of trust, can you trust the deal to be true, can you trust the other to not betray you.
I love that some people choose to send the train to the bigger number of people because they assume there's a better chance of someone noticing the danger and saving everyone
KSP is very important to game psychology, at least for me. I always spread out my Kerbals for routine missions, hoping that the public appreciates everyone, while bigger missions are done with Jeb, Bill, Bob and Val to help shine a spotlight on the OGs.
Did you see the series where they had a variety of AIs play the prisoner's dilemma? I think the only one that won consistently was nice until backcrossed and then never forgave.
Note, this involved repeated encounters.
I solved the Trolly problem! Just switch rails several times while the train is going past to derail it.
One "trolley problem" situation that happens at rapid rates in FPS is the simple revive mechanic. Because in a lot of cases, they can't be saved. They're right under the enemy's nose. In open areas, being actively sprayed at. However, you winning on your own is less likely than you and a bud winning. So then you gotta think, do I risk it? Or do I let him die and fight on my own?
Chapter 1: I'd pull the emergency brake.
Chapter 2: Always Cooperation. No matter what. Watching myself in the mirror without guilt is more worth then anything else.
Chapter 3: Help or call help (dialing 911). Did the same in MMO's as Healer, sparing a heal on someone else isn't really an issue.
Chapter 4: ... ugh.... XD
The emergency brake is broken what do you do now?
@@LexiLunarpaw turn the railway switch after the train passed halfway, so the train derails.
@@Rutanachanthe train flips and rolls over both tracks, killing you and all six people on the tracks
@@davidjennings2179 When I'm dead I can't feel guilty about it XD
The funny thing in my opinion, is that I was getting in to "the good place" the series at the exact moment this was uploaded I guess God/life itself want me to watch the full series.:)
Obviously with the trolley problem (outside version), you just turn away from the tied-down victims, let the trolley go through, and then pull the lever after it passes so the next trolley goes through on the other track. Thus, everyone on both sides is treated equally and fairly in the end.
Here I was fully expecting them to mention the Helldivers children vs mines problem haha
i'm weirdly observant and vigilant. i've helped several people that tripped and fell, or were sick and crying, struggling. i don't wait, i just go forward. i've been in situations where someone was there to help me and i know how relieving it is to be saved that way.
In DAYZ when you come across another play it is in both player’s best interests to work together 90% of the time, but this rarely happens, because the other player is a threat to you, and you are a threat to them, by killing you they eliminate a potential threat and steal your weapons and food.
The Trolley problem does not have enough data to produce a meaningful answer.
My Solution was to De-rail the train by rapidly switching the junction. forcing one half of the train to take a different track. causing it to crash.
One game that gave me a prime example of this scenario is from the most wanted mission from Batman. Arkham Knight called shadow war. In the mission, we learn that Ra’s al Ghul had survived his fatal fall from Batman Arkham city and there is a Civil War that is going on within the league of assassins and Ra’s is connected to a machine that is giving him Lazarus chemicals, which are barely keeping him alive as Batman you were told that the rebel faction has found a purer source of chemicals and when you find these chemicals and fight against the rebel faction whom you learn it’s leader is Ra’s other daughter Nyssa who urges you to go back and destroy the machine that Ra’s is connected to and let him die. It definitely brings into perspective, Batman’s moral stance on killing because there is the concern that if Ra’s is restored to full health. There is no telling what he may do or whom he may hurt, but there is the fact that if you choose to let him die, then it is essentially breaking the code that Batman is known for. I have done both endings and they are quite interesting because if you choose to give him the cure, he will kill his daughter and escape and the rebel faction will flee and war will be averted for the time being, however if you choose to destroy the Lazarus machine When Nyssa shows up to kill her father Batman says that he will take him to the police and realizing that he would only have anywhere from only a few hours to possibly only a few days left to live she agrees, and she knows that the loyalist will scatter, and she will assume control of the league and swear off any incursions against Gotham and even Bat man leaves Ra’s in a police infirmary he weakly tells Batman “Proud of You”. I always found that mission to be very interesting and you can’t feel wrong either way
I experienced the bystander effect irl, a car crashed in front of me but i just ran away
About the trolley problem. If you're forcefully put in a lose-lose situation, you can do your best to mitigate the outcome, but the responsibility is of the person that set you up.
I think fake it til you make it is the problem.
Ask for help. Admit to your insecurities. Raise people up by helping them realize that no one is perfect
Pointing and assigning duties is also part of CPR training too. Interesting.
"Someone ought to do something" has never, in itself, been helpful unless it included the rider "and that someone is me."
Watched the impostor syndrome part while I was trying to animate (I'm still learning and I put myself down most of the time) and... Wow that hit HARD....
It is always morally correct to push anyone asking the trolley problem onto the tracks of an approaching high speed trolley.
One thing that may help to aliviate imposter syndrome over time is to actually take time to celebrate your accomplishments. It sounds silly on the face of it, but celebrating small accomplishments makes them stand out more and makes the bigger ones feel earned. If you only try celebrating the big ones, it can feel awkward and uncomfortable, however, if you make a point of celebrating the small ones, acknowledging the big ones gets easier as you have more practice.
Also, celebrations can be small, like sharing a glass/cup of your beverage of choice with a friend/loved one can be an excellent way to celebrate getting this part of the project done on time. The important thing is to acknowledge it verbally and with intention.
This is something we really don't do enough nowadays 😞
In fable 2 ending you can choose between:
Saving a lot of innocent people.
Saving your pet dog.
And a lot of money.
Guess the most popular answer.
FABLE MENTION 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
I would personally like to see all the Because Games Matter all in one place
Replaces your imposter syndrome with brilliant con man syndrome
My art suck but they keep buying it above it's value
Troll problem:
Patrol areas the most often targeted in your limited time frame or target a little of everything
You cannot be everywhere, so focus on the most at risk or half heartedly do some of everything
I've done the bystander effect in sky CoTL..... There's so many instances that it's just a troll.... I flew to every call for help at first 😭
New Vegas had a solid one in Vault 34. Save 3 people trapped in the vault while dooming the share cropper farm which denies food to thousands in need, or let them die in the vault and restore the water supply.
As a Medic main in tf2, it’s hard to say if I do this trolley problem, because it does lead to either stay or leave the fight if it gets to heated, to heal the one member on the defense, or provide healing to some that are in the cart. To be defending the point, or leave the others to their own devices, its thing like these that keeps my mind occupied and makes me question my morality
HE'S EVEN A GOOD SINGER??!?!??
edit: fable 2 also has a trolley problem decision in its ending.
4 scenarios we should all think about even if you don't have the answer
Yeah the imposter Syndrome was really hard in my uni time. I thought working with someone else (instead of my usual programming group) would be good for me. But I held that person in really high regards. So when working together it was kinda hard. But later we found out that he actually thought the same about me. Because we didn't want to fail each other we basically prosponed our work for a long time. But when we knew about it from each other we were able to create something "acceptable" in just 2 weeks. We had 20 weeks for it. If we knew earlier our project would've been great.
I tend to be very critical of the Trolley Problem because it trains people to think in binaries, deliberately disqualifying alternative solutions when creative thinking tends to lead to the best solution for most problems. You can have cake and eat it if you learn how to bake.
3:20 The video game, High on Life, literally has the player face the trolley problem directly.
*The following are the musings of a Salty SEAGULL named EARL who just shows up in my posts whenever he feels like it!*
[EARL the Salty SEAGULL:] "Ah, the trolley problem, a classic conundrum that has challenged many a Philosoraptor (I should know I was a Philosoraptor in a past life)! Still I prefer out of the box answers like PUNCH the TRAIN either off the TRACKs entirely or from the front! Still that kind of scenario really only works if you have the strength to actually punch the trolley and can produce enough force to stop it, so unless your Goku or Saitama the trolley is going to run right over you, but at least you still tried to make a decision where you can die with a clean conscience!"
Thanks Lane Stanley for this episode
The simple solutions, the prisoner's dilemma is shut up and don't do anything with other people that you can't trust to shut up
The transition between the bystander effect and imposter syndrome sounded like the Calamari Inkantation... SPLATOON FANS?!
nash equilibrium is worth a talk: my issue with it and the prisoner's dilemma is assumptions. Two people engaged in a crime together would likely have prior discussions about getting caught. At that point, they could logically assume their partner would NOT betray them, so the most logical answer in self-service, is stay quiet and take the one year. You can add in that people engaging in crime would likely have certain personalities, in a real world situation time will not stop so long-term consequences must be measured like not snitching and earning respect for it/snitching and being hunted, etc.
I actually had this happen to me in XCOM. My team was deployed to a city with rampaging aliens, with the objective to save as many civilians as possible. The near end of a turn played out such that my only remaining move was deciding what to do with a soldier armed with a rocket launcher, and ahead of me, 4 nasty but wounded aliens were pressing in on one civilian. If I let them go, on their turn one of them would kill the civilian and the rest would scatter and go after other nearby civilian targets. But man, that grouping was too juicy. I had the soldier aim the rocket directly at the civilian and obliterated it, along with the 4 aliens. That civvie was realistically dead either way, but I stopped potentially an extra 3 deaths by taking out the multiple targets all in one. I still refer to that incident as the "XCOM Trolley Problem" and would do it all the same given the chance. Sorry bud lol
You always heal the tank, if everyone is playing their role properly the dps should only be taking minimal damage anyway. If the mage died its because they were standing somewhere stupid or the tank isn’t properly maintaining aggro.
the trolly problem is supposed to teach there is no such thing as a "correct" solution sometimes, just different ones
Many many husbands that make hard selfless choices to value and take care of their families suffer deeply from imposter syndrome. Tomorrow is Father’s Day. Many many many men will be told tomorrow by kids, wives and others “you’re a great dad!” Many of them will force a smile and say thanks while feeling entirely inadequate for the praise no matter how selfless and wonderful they have done.
Tomorrow remember to tell dads they are wonderful but also remember to act all the other days like they are valued in-spite of the flaws they see in themselves.
My favorite trolley problem in gaming comes in InFamous when you’re forced to choose between saving your girlfriend Tish, who’s a nurse, or five doctors. It fits perfectly in the karma system of the game where it’s framed as choosing Tish is the InFamous option and the doctors is the Heroic option. But if you do choose to save Tish? PSYCH!!! The dastardly evil Kessler knew you would do that and so Tish is actually with four other doctors and you just saved a random civilian.
OMG THE GOOD PLACE IS SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO GOOOOOOD
I think the biggest issue is that the trolley problem is by design immoral. There is no moral answer.
Next video could be called Game Minds and talking about Devs or Game's Minds talking about NPCs
To heal the tank or the mage is an easy one, assuming that there are no other healers involved... You heal the tank, because when the tank dies, the mage dies too, unless the mage is especially good at kiting, and the boss is nearly dead anyways, OR, if the tank has very high survivability.
Then, sometimes, everyone is going to die, and you just decide that "nobody dies today" and somehow pull it off, gaining the admiration of a random group of heroes who sing your praises as you gulp down some water after the fight is over.
I really liked the *SPOILERS FOR TRIANGLE STRATGEY*
Choice of weather or not to give up Roland when the Kingdom is taken over.
For context, early in the game, the king is killed and an invading force kills all of the royal family except your friend Roland, the new crown prince. You little domain is threatened and either you need to fight against near impossible odds to protect him, or give him up and keep your domain safe for now until you can fight back later. There is a couple aspects of this I like, for one Roland weighs in on the decision making, and offers himself up as sacrifice. This adds a new level of depth, because imagine if the one person on the tracks told you to give up his life, which i have not seen in a trolley problem before. Secondly, its the way the question is posed. When I played, I voted to save Roland. Not because of the friend ship him and your character had, but because in my head "It will be a lot easier/more affective to restore the throne later/revolt if we have an actual crown prince to take the throne back". That isn't how the story went nor do I think that is an option or was even brought up as an idea from the game, but the fact that there were so many angles and ideas to consider that even I was trying to reason out what to do outside of what was planned/offered as the reasonings in the game, really stuck with me.
If I am on the train I pull it, if I walking by I dont pull it
7:45 It says "It was Walpole" on the wall.
Like almost everything in life, the answer is, "It depends"
If you view Nash as optimal, it means you forgot to internalize the externals. Staying quiet is optimal over infinate itterations. Due to punishment feedback stratagies.
We NEED an extended version of matts trolley song
Love your content guys! Thanks For this ❤❤❤😊😊
The Trolley Problem: One of the less spoken of factors in the trolley problem is expected expertise and responsibility. (I am not a surgeon) Should a non-cardiologist surgeon attempt heart surgery? In most circumstances, no. A surgeon may attempt to stabilize a patient until a specialist can arrive if time is of the essence. What if a specialist, cannot arrive? The surgeon may be the patient's best shot at survival, so you can argue the surgeon should attempt to save their life. What if there are other patients they can treat who are also need surgery ASAP? The surgeon would be practicing outside their scope of practice while they were needed elsewhere, not justifiable. What if the other patients were not in urgent need of surgical intervention? Grey area; however, what if one of their patients suddenly requires urgent care while working on the other patient's heart? The morality around a lot of individual circumstances also factors in expectations and responsibilities on the individual making the decision.
I wouldn't be surprised if this contributes to the bystander effect, as briefly mentioned in that section. You might just assume someone else is more qualified to give meaningful help, whereas on your own, you're absolutely their best bet.
Ok, on the topic of tackling clate change in reguards to the prisoners dilemma, no one ever said you had to stop using fossil fuels immediately.
The best course of action is to use the fossile fuels while continuing to develop renewables such as nuclear and hydropower. You will have a lot more money for research if you aren't spending most of your budget on eliminating the power discrepancy between renewables and coal.
I loathe the trolly problem. It ignores the principal fail safe engineering. It's also a poor understanding of what it is to sacrifice and why you do it. The ONLY solution to the trolley problem is multi track drifting.
The prisoner's dilemma should seek legal advice before saying/doing anything.
Also NEVER be a bystander. Do something, even if that means just calling for help to bring in the professionals. Do a first aid course. Because if it was your loved one in need, you'd hope others would do the same.
The troley problem doesn't have an answer, maybe... but the car one does. Can the peson inside the car save themselves? almost certainly not, they are strapped in and moving at very high speeds. The person outisde the car can jump away, or react in some way to not get hurt. autonomous cars are not trolley problems, they are minimization problems where you MUST consider the probability that someone can save themselves
Personally, I would not step into a car that could decide to sacrifice me for the greater good. Not because it would be the wrong choice, but because I don't like the idea of getting sacrificed.
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THESE COMPILATIONS!!!
There are many ways in which these problems illustrate elements of their moral issues, and while distilling the problem to isolate the dilemma, it departs from reality because there are commonly more factors in play.
In the case of the trolley, if you know the singular person on the one side and dislike them, how does your response change? How many people need to be in the one side for it to balance? And what if instead the singular person was someone you loved? How many would you kill for that person?
In the prisoners' dilemma, they absolutely leave out relationships of those involved and those without. Say that you're estranged brothers and if your brother gets out he is going to commit matricide, are you now ready to talk, even if you will be ostracized or potentially murdered?
The questions are meant to draw out a point and show it to you... what do you care about? How do you feel about that?
Pathologic and Pathologic 2 had prenominal examples of the trolley problem. Do you risk your life to save an abandoned baby? What if that baby is sick with the plague? But you're the only doctor around, and you know that baby might not survive. If you die, the town could die. Or not. While you're at it, should you steal from a starving family to give yourself a better chance at survival? People are depending on you, after all.
Classic, knowing nothing but the number of people per track? I hit the one person.
The Walking Dead games are some of my favorites if all time.
The best solution to the problem is to not stand on the tracks people
I ALMOST CLOSED THE VIDEO TOO EARLY BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT ENDED AT THE MIDDLE
Am I a bad person if I solve the trolley problem with logic? I mean the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
It feels different when you push the single person in front of the trolley rather than just pulling a lever…
Or when you hear one person groaning in pain whilst you treat five others you know have a better chance of surviving.
Fake it until you make it can be an effective short term fix. Even with depression or anxiety, going in front of a mirror and cracking the most ridiculous smile at yourself, and not stopping until you have to, will make you feel better afterward for a period of time. This is not a fix for chronic conditions, but bad days or emergencies, it can help. Also, people won't bother you as much the rest of the day when they come in the public restroom and see you smiling at yourself in the mirror like a lunatic.
5:20 I’ll put the trolly in gear 5 and make it swerve off the tracks to not kill anyone! (If nobody is in the trolly)
The Trolley problem only exists in philosophy and video games not in real life, because real life always has dozens if not hundreds of solutions to any given problem. The solution to the Trolley is very very simple, pull the lever half way which will result in the Trolley derailing and hitting no one. For every imaginary Kobayashi Maru, there is a hacked third option available. It becomes more a test of how imaginative someone is or how good someone's creative problem solving is.
The point is about greater good vs personal culpability.
This comes up every single day when designing roadways that go through neighborhoods, cutting budgets to keep a hospital running, even autonomous vehicle development and EV batteries.
Also, in your example, derailing the trolley would almost certainly kill everyone on board. You just added a track, puddlebrain.
@@weetdirt No it's to trick people into thinking in false dichotomy. This is highlighted by all the conditions attached "you can only do X or Y", the freedom of choice being taken away.
There is always a third option.
I’d activate it at either half a second or 1.5 seconds away from meeting the junction (depends on the model) this would cause the trolly to go straight derailing it and only bad ending myself (if I was on it) or nobody
Puppy!
I would argue that every scenario in these philosophical exercises are overly simplistic and lack sufficient context. I'm constantly asking for clarification and further details. However, imposter syndrome is something I deal with frequently. I'm in my 40s and well into my career and I'm always feeling insufficient and undeserving of the praise and rewards I receive. I usually manage it by not thinking about it but it's brutal at times.
Thank you Lane
I've an unusual view on the trolley problem. If you pull the lever, you killed, so your responsible for two dead (yourself is one of the two), so inaction adds 3 deaths.
This means pulling the lever, and shoving the fat man are the same to me.
In the trolley problem, I'd choose to save 1 and let the 5 die, viewing life as a competition. Good and bad are relative; eliminating those 5 people might mean fewer competitors for me, which is advantageous for my own survival. If it were my baby on the other track, I'd save my baby over 5 strangers. Those 5 lives may be valuable in general, but they hold no personal significance to me. Unless saving those 5 people made me feel like a better person or had some other personal benefit, my choice would be to save those who matter to me. In essence, I'd prioritize those who add value to my life or whom I care about, over strangers who don't impact me directly.