If luffy was ever presented with the trolley problem, he would no doubt just go and fight the trolley instead of choosing to pull or not! And that is why luffy never listens to backstories because that could sway him! If you look at the trolley problem with 0 context the only thing causing harm or bad is the trolley itself!
The best part about this comment is you’re wrong: Luffy followed the trolly problem and got severely punished for it. In Sabaody, the train was St. Charlos. He could do nothing and have his crew be safe, or pull the lever to save Camey and avenge Hatchan. He pulled the lever, causing the biggest defeat in the entire series. And immediately after punching Charlos, he says sorry. He realizes he wasn’t thinking clearly, and I think Luffy knew in that moment he just ruined everything. Because in that moment he allowed the Celestial Dragons to restrict his freedom and dictate his actions. That’s after not learning from his first major low point in the series, his trolly problem in Water-7. In Water-7, when he argued with Usopp over the Merry, Usopp narrowed his vision into 2 options: stick to his decision as captain, or keep the Merry. As highlighted by Zoro, a captain needs to be confident in his decisions and know what he’s doing for the betterment of the crew. And Luffy was told the logic that the Merry could literally not go any farther without breaking in half. But he if chose to keep the Merry, he would also keep Usopp on his crew. The thing is, no one, especially Usopp, was thinking clearly in this moment. Luffy chose his side as a captain and everything went wrong, almost permanently losing Usopp, and then the entire crew. Post time-skip Luffy develops greatly, because in Whole Cake Island it is highlighted what Luffy should have done with Usopp. He doesn’t pick a side with Sanji, and instead tells Sanji “I cannot become pirate king without you!!!” He did not choose a side, and if he did this with Usopp… that’s all Usopp wanted to hear. To be reassured he was not disposable as a crewmate. So that’s the beauty of Luffy. That he’s developed so much over the course of 1000 episodes, even when we don’t notice. But Luffy has failed the trolly problem before, and he bounces back to get it right eventually.
@@nii9931 oh man i absolutely LOVE this comment this is incredible thank you so much for taking the time to write this all out. i think you're spot on on everything here and i love how your analysis aligns with my premise. honestly i LOVE the framing of this topic through solely the main character's progression. tbh i may take this and make it into a follow up video - about how luffy's development with trolley problems shows his development as a character
In summary Franky knew the solution to the trolley problem all along. Jump in front of it and turn yourself into a cyborg. Oh, wait, that's the Sea Train Problem. Totally different thing.
Fighting the trolly is how Luffy has always worked. No matter what island or country he's in. He sees the choices the people have been given and says "I'mma just go beat up the person in charge of this"
@fromnoonon same with Nami and her home town. He throws hands with Arlong because he makes Nami cry. He got super pissed when Arlong called Nami a tool
I think the greatest example of this is the Enel situation in Skypeia. After the survival game Enel presents the remaining 5 contestants with options: go with him or die. And everyone present all makes the same choice: "fuck your options YOU die." Rejecting his options and making their own. It's probably one of One Piece's philosophies regarding agency and freedom reminding people that no matter the overwhelming forces against you; you still have options. If there are none present make your own. Reject any options given to you by forces that don't have your best interests in mind.
Oh dude yes I love this parallel. Hadn’t thought of it. It also makes me think that enel’s game is what Imu is doing with the sinking of the world too.
@@fromnoonon Yeah I have a feeling Imu might lash out once he's exposed. If the survival game hasn't started yet then it will soon if Vegapunk's message sets him off.
Your dive into Oden's decision made me appreciate the argument between Luffy and Vivi at Alabasta even more. "People die" -Monkey D. Luffy A cold hard fact. Oden did what Vivi tried to do, and play the slow game to potentially extend people's lives. Oden ultimately failed to protect Wano due to this decision. Luffy, not even knowing who Crocodile was or what kind of cunning skill he has decided he should just beat up Crocodile now, based solely on instinct. Luffy's way may (or may not) have had some casualties within the two fighting armies, but at least the country was saved that day. When I first watched Alabasta I was slightly confused as to what they (Luffy and Vivi) were arguing about. The Oden folly put it into perspective.
One piece is a story about just pushing the trolley off the tracks rather than having the trolley hit the people on them I guess. No trolley problem if there's no trolley...
I'd say Robin pulled the lever, then regretted her decision when the Straw Hats convinced her that it would be okay and that they would stop the trolley. Robin didn't solve the problem by rejecting the trolley, she very much embraced the idea of there being no other outcome, it was entirely the Straw Hats that stopped the trolley.
Ohhh this is a great point. She originally actually pulled the lever in alabasta when she told Luffy to let her die honestly. And he ignored that decision. And then again, he ignored her decision in ennies lobby. I do 100% think that by the time Luffy and the gang get to her and he presses her again and again her mind finally opened her mind to rejecting the premise. Because I’d agree that she embraced there being no other outcome, up until the climactic moment of the arc where she changes her perspective and says she wants to live. Great take thank you so much for this comment
This has never occurred to me, it's just so... beautifully childish, it's the most logical and imaginative way to resolve it, the most human way; the most Luffy way.
I think everyone should approach life by looking at problems and asking “what would Luffy do?” Then you end up solving your problems by punching them or eating them
"Oh no, the train is gonna hit either one person or a bunch of people! What do we do?!" Sabin: "...I'm gonna suplex that train." "Wait what, you can't just-" But it was too late, he was already suplexing the train...
There's only one thing you should have added to this video. When you mention fighting the trolley, you should show either Franky or Yokozuna trying to stop the Sea Train. ITs the perfect physical manifestation of this metaphorical problem and was all I could imagine when you said it.
Hahah I’m glad Im not alone. I kept trying to find the line for that but that scene doesn’t align with the dilemma and I didn’t want to show horn ut. I should’ve addressed the zuneisha in the room though
Really appreciate the kind words ♥️ I rewatch one piece all the time and starting to make these videos has really given watching it a whole new light. It’s such a simple series but such a complex one at the same time. What’s your favorite arc so far?
@@fromnoonon Unpopular maybe, but my personal favorite arc has gotta be Fishman Island. The feeling I got when seeing the growth of the Straw Hats after the timeskip combined with the beautiful and rich atmosphere of Fishman Island gave the arc a vibe that I immediately fell in love with. Overhated imo.
I agree with the conclusions you draw, but they feel incomplete. Robin doesn't choose to pull the lever as much as the straw hats demand to pull it with her. One piece rejects the powerlessness of the victims by allowing them to fight the trolley with the conductor.
There's a trolley problem on sabaody. Saint Charlos is about to take both Hachi and Camie, so Saint Charlos is the trolley, and the options are: 1. Try to scape with them or 2. Let the celestial dragon take them. But Luffy since the beggining saw that the problem was Saint Charlos himself, so he attacked him, putting Luffy and his crew in danger but saving Hachi and Camie
Ahh, in Spider-Man 1, Peter is pushed by Green Goblin to choose between Mary Jane and a bunch of kids...in a trolley. Well I'll be damned. Never realized it.
Made me smile as if a DON sound effect came with it, like I was facing a new dawn, like color slowly taking over a gray world of moral ambiguity. Then again, this video made me realize the trolley is likely to have passengers. That, regardless of the choice, the "clash" of A and B or A and C will likely be inevitable. Self-sacrifice might be optional. The power posits that the trolley is coming, and that context steers a choice. The very second one is demanded a choice, one should realize the trap he is being set up in - a system built by the demander's definition, and rise up against the demander. It's not the fault of either party they were tied up in the tracks. It's not relevant whether the trolley's passengers like the ride or not. Self-sacrifice from one might be demanded. You fight the trolley. Awesome. Awesome video. Oda. Damn.
That DON. Reminded me of Franky master, TOM. That guy also had some good dilemas and choices in the manga. I think he chose to pull the lever, but in the he reject it all.
One Piece really is a series about a groupd of people who are given two unfair choices, and then choose to beat up the person giving the choices instead if making one. The most effective way to avoid injustice is to address the source of the injustice, not play along.
You will never get to the trolley problem arc if you keep watching at a den den mushi’s pace! Or I’m going to keep making One Piece videos so you feel left out
Wait does Oden have the power to finish off Kaido when he returned? As far as I remember, Kaido was pretty much unbeatable by anyone not of Yonko or Admiral power in that time period. The best Oden could do was scar Kaido. So even if Oden fought to the end he probably wouldn't have killed Kaido, he would have died and possibly all of the scabbards would have died in battle with him, and Wano would still be enslaved. The best case scenario if Oden fought the metaphorical Kaido trolley is that his death wouldn't be boiling and he convinces the scabbards to leave him, leading to the cascading events that lead to where we ultimately end up in the canon story. The only major difference being how Oden died. Overall the video is a pretty good overview on the trolley problem presented in One Piece. The issue isn't which to sacrifice, but to punch the ever living hell out of the trolley. There isn't just two options most of the time, it just takes a bit of creativity and some power to find an alternative solution.
the oden one is interesting. i'm not sure if he would've won that 1:!, kaido certainly seemed to think it was possible oden could've defeated him. would he have actually won though? hard to say. but even beyond that, oden could have called on whitebeard or roger to help him. i mean roger owed oden big time as it were. my point with that example in connection to the larger idea was basically that oden outright excepted the premise of the situation presented to him by oden/orochi instead of thinking he could overcome it like luffy essentially did in the wano arc i really appreciate your comment and kind words! thanks so much for taking the time to watch and give me your thoughts on it
@@fromnoonon Oh, you make a fantastic point about Oden not calling Roger or Whitebeard for assistance. It does seem like an oversight. I know Roger and Whitebeard don't need to be fully Luffy like and drop everything to help Oden, but you're right you would think they would lend a hand at least. Maybe the complete isolationism of Wano had something to do with it? The lack of information coming out of Wano? But you could argue Whitebeard would have some form of intelligence network keeping tabs on powerful people like Kaido, right? So he would at least have an idea that Kaido may be targeting Wano. Then he maybe notifies Roger about Wano? Yeah, I got no idea why Oda couldn't have Oden ask for help or why Whitebeard couldn't know Kaido's movements. Beyond that whole conundrum, yes, I do see that you were contrasting Luffy and Oden's decisions in regards to the Kaido trolley. I enjoyed the video greatly, I appreciated your deconstruction of story events to show how it can fit the mold of the trolley problem and how Oda finds alternative solutions to the trolley.
@@Deode-d4h yeah i think the whitebeard thing is a huge oversight. even if he knew, he may not do anything until oden asks. but if oden got the squad together they couldve whooped kaido easy. again,. thanks! really appreciate all the comments and the constructive feedback and thoughts on everything!!!
The trolley example was never posed as a problem. The philosophy professor who came up with it was making the point that we should always seek the welfare of the many.
Trolley problems are certainly a way to manipulate people. I do customer service and a client brought back a trailer late. They gave me a "choice" to either lock the trailer themselves (expecting me to give in and give them the lock) or that I would have to lock the trailer, disregarding the services being closed. I chose to not lock the trailer and not give them the lock, letting them return the next day or leave the trailer unlocked on the terrain. What I know now is that the trailer was still their responsibility and if it was stolen that night even on the company's terrain, it would have been their responsibility, since the services to officialise the return were closed. Then again, they were fighting the trolley of company guidelines.
its really funny that you mentioned the good place because this is ta simular conclusion they came to, although theirs was self sacrife take the trolley off the track and in doing so sacrife yourself. good video
Great analysis and conclusion! A few people below said that Luffy does get punished sometimes for his decision to fight the trolley, this in my view just emphasizes the importance and weight of Luffys decision. Yes, he won't always be able to destroy the trolly but if he didn't try he would be leaving it on the tracks to potentially kill even more people. The solution isn't destroying the trolley but trying to destroy it, inspiring others to do the same, something Oda shows greatly through the concept of inherited will. The solution is getting to the core question of What made the trolley?, every single time such a dilemma occurs, and Luffy does.
dude yes! exactly. luffy doesnt always win, but its not always about winning that battle. lose the battle, win the war type stuff tbh. your comments are awesome ty so much my friend
This strikes me as a strange way to redefine the trolley dilemma. The trolley itself isn't those things you mentioned. The trolley is the impact of your decision to act or not act. It's literally unavoidable unless you are incapacitated. You can't really reject the trolley dilemma because you have to choose to act or not act, and that decision will always have an impact. The trolley dilemma isn't about right or wrong; it's a thought experiment that can tell us something about what we as individuals value depending on what you put on the tracks. You put human lives there, you find out how the individual values a single human life against multiple when they believe the outcome is certain. In reality, though, the outcomes of our decisions are rarely so certain, so it has little practical application. Your argument is that we should reject the idea of making a decision by deciding not to decide? It feels like you're conflating the trolley dilemma with being presented with an ultimatum. But the trolley dilemma doesn't give you an external factor to rail against. There is no entity that set up the situation for you to challenge or blame. Because it's about the fact that you have to make decisions in life and that those always have consequences. The situations you described in One Piece are of characters being presented with ultimatums. There is an entity that created the situation that can be challenged, thus the ultimatum and the idea that there is a binary choice can be challenged. But the trolley dilemma is truly binary because the choices are action or inaction.
well, yes. you're right but also a bit wrong. because the trolley problem is an ethical dilemma that's inherently a hypothetical and not based on real circumstance. part of the purpose of this video is showing that when you apply ethical dilemma hypotheticals into the real world they dont fit cleanly. when you present a trolley problem to luffy he rejects the premise, because he can. hypotheticals dont work irl and it shows when you start doing these exercises. you're right, but also missing part of the point
my argument was that luffy wasn't actually presented with any trolley dilemmas. he's presented with ultimatums. the trolley dilemma doesn't need to be based on real circumstances because it's not about whether the decision you make is right or wrong. and i'm pretty sure i covered that it's not realistic because we can rarely ever be so certain about the consequences of our actions. you seem to be missing my point.
"Fighting the trolley" has a certain chance of success and results in no one dying if it succeeds or 5 people dying if it doesn't. You're not "solving" anything, you're just distracting from the core question by adding a probability question on top.
But you’re approaching this from a real world perspective instead of a fictional universe. This isn’t a philosophical answer that is applicable to our world, but it’s how the trolley problem is solved in the one piece universe
And you’re surrendering to preordained notions and inevitability if you do. Why accept an ultimatum? Is the source invincible, immovable? No? Then nothing gets solved until you confront it. You’re not making a true choice, you’re just selecting the options presented before you as immutable. Someone _will_ die if you don’t do anything about the trolley. But you have a chance to save _everyone_ if you have some stones and try to derail that goddamn train.
I remember the first time learning about this and thought it was so stupid because why would someone choose to kill more people then less people??? But it’s interesting thinking of it in one piece. Does the anime really say to never kill? I don’t know :D I work with computers not philosophy
well i think something that's an underlying point of this issue is that in conflict or war, people will get hurt. like luffy said to vivi in alabasta. so i dont think the dilemma itself is dumb - its a product of reality. but i do think oda compels us to not accept the situations we're in and look at the premise of these "problems" to see if we can reject them at all. the choice in dealing with problems isnt always as binary as we think it is
A few months ago, I was catching up to One Piece at the same time a friend was playing through The Telltale Walking Dead games. In trying to explain to my friend why I hated those games, I brought up this exact thing: they present you with a trolley problem over and over and over again, and theres so solution that involves destroying the trolley. I related it to One Piece and how Luffy wouldn't accept the tragedy that comes with the decisions Telltale expects you to make. Excited to see someone else come to the exact same conclusions!
As a trolly meme enjoyer. I expect something absurd, violent, and over the top as the solution. Nothing else is acceptable. *THERE WAS NO KINGDOM OF LULUSIA!*
Sengoku is the one who gave permission of a buster call. Sengoku gave them the golden denden mushi, if he didn't gave permission, they will not be allowed to use that.
There’s a train barreling down the tracks. On the course it’s on, I will take this comment as a compliment. However, if my brain decides to do a madness and I pull the lever I will take this compliment as a slight. What should I do? But fr thank you for the comment and watching! Had a ton of fun making this video. Also love rosinante ❤️
Living in the philippines, a third world country, where the people think a corrupt government is the only way of life is miserable; they have the option to choose better people or better yet support in the effort to make the change happen. It's tragic to see a country take for granted the democracy it fought for throughout it's history
♥️ you are a mensch thank you so much for the compliment! Slowly but surely if I keep making good content it’ll happen. I just really like making videos and talking about anime so even if I don’t have followers I love doing it!
Yes absolutely and I should’ve clarified. In a lot of ways I meant the thing that happens in an episode where they spend 5-10 min showing what happened in the last three episodes. That’s an issue of episodic content more than just one piece tho
the thing with this is that i wonder if oda ever even thought about this??? you are probably right with all this but do you think he ever thought about it
hmmm. I don't know. my guess would be that he didnt think about it this way - like he never set out to create an anime scene or arc which tackles the issue of the trolley problem. but maybe he used a basis in philosophy to write the story. more than anything, i think the trolley problem is so applicable to human morality and conflict that it pops up again and again and again in literature
He definitely thought about it. Maybe not in this way specifically, but Oda has a ton of storytelling patterns within the story with repeating themes. An example of this is the Frankenstein’s Monster story. We see it in Chopper, Franky, Oars, Kuma, etc. This entire series is about choice and the results actions have. In the SBS Oda even literally drew two different versions of the future of each main character. He had a good timeline and a bad timeline. Ideally these changes happened based on choices. Joyboy lost his world based on a choice. Ace, before he died, made a choice. Garp wanted Luffy to be a Marine, but Luffy made a choice to become a pirate. Vivi had a choice to become a pirate or remain a Princess. I actually think Luffy as the chosen one is an interesting concept because he seems like the type to reject being a hero or having a destiny since all he wants is freedom and he doesn’t want to be a hero. But circumstances have led him in embracing that role more and more, specifically with Wano.
Luffy says he's not a hero, because he won't share his meat. And yeah, it's dumb and silly, but take it apart and you see: He defines heroism by sacrifice. And Luffy doesn't sacrifice. He will not accept a choice between two things he wants, he will go "No, gimme both." And so, Luffy believes he isn't a hero, because he will help Everyone he wants to save and protect.
It's interesting to compare these scenes to the classic trolley problem, but I just don't think it really applies in most of these cases. In Sengoku's case, we don't know if his decision actually would have "averted" destiny because his orders were not followed through. Sengoku may have pulled the lever first, but Jaguar and to an even greater extent Kuzan "pulled the lever back". Kuzan especially had at LEAST 3 separate chances, and is the real lever puller in all this. Oden's "trolley" is a bit more of a classic case, and even Kaido chastises him as much when Oden goes to slay him later, but I think it's important to remember the context when Oden made that decision: he had literally JUST tried to slay Orochi, and was stopped by one of those most broken fruits in OP: the barrier fruit. Remember that Oden has demonstrated upper echelon level haki (enough to survive scrapes with Whitebeard and Roger), and his attacks just bounced right off that ridiculous barrier. Fighting them openly right then and there would've meant people dying as he banded together his samurai and somehow overcoming that fruit. Was he naive for not pretending to agree and instead planning a sneak attack (which he half does later but was foiled by the spy)? Sure, but honor is a two-edged sword ironically, and he would've had to throw away his honor to do what needed to be done, which is why morality is not so simple. I also think it's not quite fair to put all this on Oden either.... he was one guy. One very strong guy, but still just one guy. Where the hell is the rest of the leadership during all this? In this case, it'd be more accurate to say the entire country of Wano pulled the lever, and that's why it fell. As you said, Robin's "trolley" is even more complex, where she chooses her own death over that of her crewmates, because she (as well as most of the world) thought the government (the trolley) could not BE beaten. So there's kinda two trolleys going on at the same time, the imminent threat to the Straw Hat crew, and the far off one with the 800 year void information potentially causing global destabilization. That said, Robin's "lever pull" moment doesn't really fit the trolley I think, since in that moment, the crew had already been through hell and were literally standing in deep enemy territory before her eyes, what was she gonna do? Say "Nah I'm good" and the Straw Hats grumble, pack up and go home? The Rubicon was long passed by that point, I think that very powerful scene more illustrates her own internal struggle with her extremely deep-seated trauma. The trolley problem is intended to illustrate "Greater Good" philosophical thinking, but I think One Piece does a pretty good job of pointing out what a dangerous way of thinking it is, because trolley problem operates on two assumptions being always true: 1) the trolley cannot be stopped in time 2) the trolley must choose between the paths with people on them. We see this time and time again where the heroes stop the unstoppable. It's nice when you can just punch the trolley and the problem goes away, but it's important to remember that not every trolley can be fought. *points at Marineford war to save Ace* But hey, it's Anime, it'd be depressing if every trolley was realistic.
thank you so much for this comment, it's so well thought out and articulated and honestly i deeply agree with you here. the trolley problem itself isnt a real world problem, and it definitely doesnt have a hard answer. its a dilemma, an ethical metaphor to make people think about moral choices in crisis. and the examples i chose are anything but a 1:1 with the problem from a philosophical or irl perspective too thats part of why my conclusion with how one piece approaches this dilemma is to reject the premise. its an anime and we're talking about a hypothetical moral dilemma within this fictional universe - they have the power to reject the premise entirely!
There is no modicum of meaningful control with the one at the lever, therefore there is no meaningful moral dilemma. The pressure of immediate decision making is implied, but standing around and doing nothing or throwing the lever because it's the quicker choice to a better outcome is morally grey at best. If you have the time to do one thing, attcking the heart of the problem no matter how hard it is is always a better than just standing there. And the fool who insists of the moral laziness of the subject is amoral. A better modernized approach is a doctor is presented with a prior diagnosis of a transferred patient, which is exhibiting two distinct symptoms. The doctor can perscribe one of two medicines; they are highly risky, if not lethal, when both are present in the patient, but will treat the one of the symptoms successfully at the neglect of the other. Both symptoms are serious and will likely devolve into a life threatening if left unchecked. What is the right move? In choosing one of the two, the doctor has failed to make the correct choice. Treating the symptoms of the disease and not the disease itself if and when the means are available means choosing a deliberately worse option at the expense of the patient. Being limited by artificial choices is not how we advance as a species, be it moral or scientific.
Dunno how you ended up on my landing page but i rly enjoyed the video. Take my thumbs up and my abo! :D (Sorry for some english mistakes I'm gonna make. I'm not a native english speaker^^ ) One piece is an awesome story and it teaches us alot about the real world without mentioning it once. For example we face the question if it right to overthrow a system multiple times in the story from different points of view. In Arabasta we saw ppl who took their right to fight for there freedom and wealth while on the other side the soldiers of the king fought for that exact same reason. Both sides fought to stabilize their country. Both sides wanted to archive the best for all of them; including their enemies. None of those sides knew that there was a 3rd force hidden in the shadows. The person who orchestrated the whole war. The next time we see this problem is already the very next arc. We faced the overthrowing of systematic believes by noland which turned out to be a good thing for the ppl but a bad thing for noland himself. We also had in the very same arc a premise what would had happen if crocodile would have won there. Embodied by Enel. We saw both sides would still fight each other, while both are afraid of the 3rd force now. Basically teaching us to look for connections with others and to face the real thread. We saw something like that during WW2. The allies teamed up with the former and later enemy of russia to fight the third force which was germany. Moving on we had alot of stuff which was more like small riots to the system overall which turned out to be the paramount war, but right after the timeskip we had FMI. We faced again the premise of two sides clashing and one stand next to it. This time around we had fishmen vs fishmen. The progressive fishmen who wanted to overcome their own racism vs the fishmen who wanted to hold on this very racism because this racism formed them. The third force here was mankind itself. It formed this racism but also some of It's people were far enought to overcome this very racism. So the weak people of mankind joined forces with the racist fishmen. (Not voluntary, but it happend.) The strong people joined forces with the fishmen who wanted to overcome this stupid racism. In that the overthrow of the system would have been a disaster for all. So the system won. On Dressrosa we saw again two sides clashing and this time around the system was corrupt. It had disasterous flaws. You needed to check your own privilege by taking a closer look to the problems. This was cleverly solved by sugars df ability. We also got a 2nd scenario what would have happend if corcodile won. This time around we just had 2 parties envolved by the outcome. Ppl who fought for their freedom and the reigning Don Quichotte family who took their freedom. Sometimes we don't see that our freedom was taken since our feeling of wealth was good. This is also a systematic problem that exists all over the world. Oda is telling us the story of different outcomes of the very same scenario with shifted conditions. Sorry for my long comment :3
dude do NOT apologize i absolutely love this comment!!! and your english is very very good. i have a video that's directly about this that I think you'd really like: th-cam.com/video/SjcnKmdDxvQ/w-d-xo.html
@@fromnoonon Luffy already declared war on the World government by burning the flag. He actively essentially broke the trolley. He might not look like it, but when its important he is a social mastermind. He saw right through Nami's lies (Aarlong Park), Robin's lies (W7/EL), Sanjis lies (WCI) and made friends of Bon Kurei and Bellamy - one being an awesome guy who got into a criminal organization somehow and the other being a hard working guy admiring the wrong people. Noone else would have noticed any of that.
Sengoku wasnt fleet admiral during Ohara. The ones that ordered the Buster Call were the Gorosei. Ohara's fate was already decided. Its exactly why Vegapunk recorded his message. There is no trolley when it comes to Imu. Either you die or fight back. But the WG is an entity so powerful, even fighting back is bound to cause death and misery
that's not necessarily correct, although it is slightly more ambiguous about who ordered it than i let on. but its direct that sengoku was the one who ordered saul to lead the buster call
@@unnamedshadow1866 hmm you could be right. i know sengoku was the one actually at ohara in charge, but kong couldve been the one who gave the order. my bad
I think people get a lot about luffy wrong. The only reason luffy would fight the trolly at all is because the entire trolley problem implies the one tied in the tracks alone is someone dear to you. If luffy didn't know anyone in the tracks he might not even try to save anyone. He's not a hero, he only saves people who he considers friends or gave him food or something. He'd never even went against Doflamingo if not for law's plans.
The trolly problem has always seemed like a bullshit philosophical question to me. Because most of the time we are not talking about the actual trolly problem where it's 1 life VS many with a timer counting down, and in that case you always sacrifice the one. Marines deal with too many MIGHTS for it to even be close to considered an actual trolly problem, not to mention how much more damage they do just by getting involved. In the case of Sengoku he chose what he chose knowing it was wrong, knowing it was bullshit propoganda, there was no tough decision because no one was going to die before the marines interfered so saying it's a trolly problem is wrong. Same with all the other instances. Oden's decision was a decision made on the spot that effects many people, HOWEVER it's still not a trolly problem because he thought all he was sacrificing was his pride and throne not an actual life. The trolly problem has always been a bullshit question that isn't even that deep or philosophical cause unless you're a mass murder wanting to kill more people, you always chose the 1 because in an actual trolly problem there is no other choice for anyone.
The true Conquers in One Piece Luffy, Roger, and Whitebeard always sacrifices the many to save the few whereas the evil Marines like Pre-Timeskip Sengoku claims to sacrifice the few for the many, so true Conquers like Whitebeard, Luffy, and Roger would either destroy the trolly itself, or Luffy's case in Enies Lobby pulled the lever to sacrifice the many for the few, so you wouldn't develop the mindset of a Conquer with your way of thinking.
@@RoronoaZoro-ur6hr No one was ever sacrificed. Luffy never chooses to sacrifice anyone. Enies Lobby was about saving one friend from from people CLAIMING she would destroy the world but would have used Robin's knowledge to destroy many. Robin herself would never have destroyed anyone. So in the end Luffy saved more lives because he fought a war against the biggest group of murderers in the world. The world government always sacrifices many to save their own self interests, Same with Ace and Whitebeard and Rodger. None of them went in thinking they will sacrifice anyone. That's the flaw in your logic.
No it’s valid! A few people have brought this up. It’s mentioned briefly in Ennies Lobby that it was the fleet admiral who ordered Ohara and at the time it was sengoku I believe so I did maybe draw that one out a bit
Now I'm wondering if the train scene in Franky's flashback of him trying to stop the puffing tom was an intentional visual metaphor for the trolley problem 🤔
I was wondering the same thing as I edited this. I couldn’t make the parallel fit right in my head but that’s not to say it isn’t true. But so many of these comments have pointed out tons of instances of the trolley problem in one piece I didn’t mention I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s something there, at least as a visual metaphor
The correct solution of stopping the trolley reminds me of what Captain Kirk did with the Kobayashi Maru test. Instead of facing a no win situation he changed the conditions of the test.
That is not how the trolly problem works but I guess it is a good mind game. In the trolly problem you only have those two option since you are a person standing next to the switch. You pushing off the trolly is not an option (well it is, when you want to die with the other people), since one person can´t move a multiple 100kg 40km/h trolly off the tracks. But a little funfact, if the trolly is faster than 40 km/h and it goes over the junction it most probably derails giving you the option of random killing all, half or none :D
Hahah that is good to know the next time im in this scenario! But in reality, the trolley problem isn’t a real problem at all. It’s an ethical dilemma that’s always hypothetical. So applying it to anything actually deterministic is a bit of a round peg square hole situation
My favorite thing about Ohara is Aokiji lets one perspn go and the story goes on to prove he was wrong for doing so, by ruining an entire country and likely killing wsy more than Ohara.
I very much agree with the conclusion that this video comes to that fighting the trolly is the solution to the trolly problem. However, I don't think that One Piece fully supports this idea. Take the Ohara situation for example. The knowledge of the people there had the potential to cause the death of many people in the world. When the Navy decided to destroy Ohara, they weren't allowing that threat to destroy only one island to keep the rest of the world safe, they were actively destroying the island to prevent the threat itself. They decided to fight the train that was the Ohara people and the risk they provided to the rest of the world. And I think we would both agree that this is the wrong thing to do. In the Wanno situation, it really isn't a trolly problem at all, because the people were always going to be enslaved no matter what Oden did. It's more like a situation where a trolly is going down tracks at a group of people and you can decide to do a silly dance or not before you do anything. Also, Oden did fight the trolly, which caused the death of many samurai and many civilians when he failed. We can argue that Oden should have fought at the beginning, but he didn't have the support of the Akazaya Nine and he didn't know that Kaido was going to get stronger at a pace faster than he was.
Ohhh you know what man this is so interesting and something I wish I thought to discuss in this video. Like I agree and disagree with you because it feels like ultimately this is about perspective. Your take on ohara you flipped how I set the premise on its head a bit, making the train the knowledge they had learned instead of it being the use of force itself. Honestly I kind of like that perspective more, I think it offers a more direct look at how the situation fits into this context. Thanks for the comment. Gave me a lot to think about.
Oden should’ve fought because they would’ve came to support him. The World Government situation isn’t really a trolley because the Elders/WG don’t care about Ohara in reality.
I know and i tried to find the line on this for so long but ultimately that sequence just didn’t fit in to this dilemma. Maybe I should’ve made a section addressing that itself lol
a thought i had not that long ago is why hero's don't trade lives, because if saving some puts some else in danger than you just need to save them too there actions dont need to stop after one heroic deed. the ends justify the means arguments are always wrong because there is no end, the world will keep spinning and life will go on so all that is left is the terrible actions to arrive at a desired point for only a short while that's why even if they do is immeasurable good when that good ends you are back where you started but now a monster
The kid's decision to put the safe person onto the other track to make sure all 6 were hit brings up a new ethical dilemma. Is he now responsible for one death but innocent of the other 5, because he killed them through inaction, or did he take responsibility for all 6 because he did take action in the overall situation? My own take is that by moving the other person he made taking the alternate track into a clear solution instead of a dilemma. He may not have directly killed the other 5 but it is at least negligent homicide because his inaction is no longer justifiable on the grounds of not wanting to choose who dies. In a legal view the 5 would count as felony murders because they died during the commission of the murder of the 6th person.
@@fromnoonon Nah, you're good. I really liked the video! Its just a narrative I've seen in reactor communities with such prevalence recently that it makes me feel like people forget the circumstances surrounding why its the case. People tend to look at arcs like Baratie with rose tinted glasses despite it being one of the most poorly paced arcs in the series and then they simultaneously hate arcs like LRLL despite it being paced better than average arcs and being a ton of fun even with 4 of its episodes being anime cannon. It makes me sad because these narratives are pushed at new fans and it biases them when they may have just enjoyed the things that are stigmatized to be "bad".
The answer I gave my mom at about 15 when she discussed this stuff with me (she was taking an ethics class for a master's at the time) and my answer was to find a way to derail the train. I couldn't get why that frustrated her.
I think there was another i could think of to do with oden When he returned to Wano with Roger to get the poneglyth, he knew that Wano was spiralling into a darker place but he choose to stay ignorant of the problem so he could fulfil his duty to guide roger to Laugh tail This i think's interesting because it was an example of just ignoring it, letting the trolley persist and leaving the lever. But again, like all the other examples, its not that simple. It wasn't as simple as just "leave Wano or fight against the big bad" Staying with roger was world changing, outside of Wano finding the one piece shook the world and created a new era (infact it may have even been the reason luffy became a pirate) So with this in mind, the trolley problem changes. It's no longer a matter of one side of the tracks Wano's future, the other side go with Rogger. Because thurther down the line is so much more then just Wano Originally Rogger was the one person on the track and Wano was a country. But in retrospect Oden leaving Wano even if he could have stopped all the bad things that happened to Wano, he saved the whole world that lay after On the surface it looks simple, stay in Wano pull the lever. But when you add the context you realise its not just staying with roger, its shaping the new world So in a sense, Odens choice to do nothing when he first confronted Wano was pulling the lever to save the world that lay after, sacrificing Wano. A realy tough choice.
There is a trolly that will run over my hand before it hits the sub button, but if you pull a lever, the trolly will, instead, careen into my other hand that was going to hit the like button. Do you pull the lever?
Fighting the trolly doesn’t fix the problem it’s a cop out that doesn’t do anything You don’t solve the trolley problem by beating it and making no sacrifices that’s a fantasy you solve it by deciding how it must be solved
True shit Luffy would not pull the lever He would punch the train or the railroad The Trolley Problem is in truth not a problem of choice but a problem of accepting the premise that is only 2 options
I would say that Robin didn’t pull the lever and turn the world govt at her friends, because Luffy by design aimed the world govt at himself. His ploy was, we picked a fight with them, and since that was your one fear about staying with us, that’s no longer an excuse. Now tell us how you really feel. Again Luffy broke the problem, because at every chance Robin chooses to turn the trolley away from the Straw Hats and Luffy says “I’ll just stand on the tracks anyway, this collision is going to happen and we won’t lose to it either, so believe in us.” It’s as if, the trolley is turned from the five people to the one person, and now it’s on a collision course on that path, and the five jump on the other track in front of the one.
We literally learn this in every fight Luffy is in. Every single opponent insists on trying to reason with him, trying to give him options, but all of them with their plans and their goals fail to realize that you can’t reason with a magical fighting crackhead who only thinks based on instinct, and will either eat, sleep, drink or fight and most of those options don’t really apply to dealing with villains outside of fighting and maybe possibly sleeping if Zoro is there to take over. Luffy isn’t smart, he’s lucky. He does whatever he wants to do, and it just so happens that what he wants to do is usually a good thing (aside from eating the entire food supply), it’s pure coincidence. You can’t force a philosophical problem on him because he’ll probably take a ride in the trolley, rescue the people on the tracks just because they’re in the way, and probably overthrow the local government while he’s at it.
@@fromnoonon It isn't a bad one, but if you go further into this topic, it might be a good idea to discuss how dishonest people use the Trolley Problem to make honest people do awful things. Sengoku was tricked into choosing the "least terrible" option, but it is turning out that the world order he was protecting was built on lies and concealing horrible secrets, and deserved to be taken down no matter the consequences. Oden thought that by taking Kaido's deal he'd be saving Wano from a terrible fate, only for Kaido to have never intended to keep his word and to turn Wano into a place worse than hell. Nico Robin was convinced to turn herself in for the sake of her friends, but it the revelations of recent chapters are anything to go by the knowledge she has will be critical to saving all of them, if not the entire world, from an upcoming apocalypse. To give you a metaphor, when dishonest people give you a trolley problem, they don't tell you that the track with one person leads to a nuclear reactor, and the trolley is full of high explosives so switching to the track with one person will have far more casualties than the one with just five people. The trolley problem assumes a situation in a vacuum, that there will be no more consequences beyond just the "5 or 1", and honest people will take that at face value. That's why dishonest people love it so very much: You can convince good, kind, and honest people to commit horrible atrocities if you present the trolley problem in just the right way.
None of these are Trolley Problems. The philosophical question is, can you justify purposefully killing someone if doing so saves the lives of more other people? The intent is important here. It’s a question of responsibility, not numbers. The point of the situation is that more people WILL die if you choose not to interact with it. But if you do get involved, you can only save those people if you personally directly kill someone else. Sengoku *thought* he was engaging in a trolley problem, because he believed that if the knowledge of Ohara got out (which would happen on its own if he did not intervene) would cause many more deaths by destabilizing the world. Within this framework, he made the call that he thought meant saving more people. The problem is that he was wrong. It was never actually a trolley problem, and things would have worked out for the better had he not intervened.
If luffy was ever presented with the trolley problem, he would no doubt just go and fight the trolley instead of choosing to pull or not! And that is why luffy never listens to backstories because that could sway him! If you look at the trolley problem with 0 context the only thing causing harm or bad is the trolley itself!
Luffy is that protagonist that would fight the train instead of untying the damsel tied to its tracks!
EXACTLY. I think that’s the point of Luffy and why the whole hero debate exists. The dude doesn’t want context, he just wants to throw hands
The best part about this comment is you’re wrong: Luffy followed the trolly problem and got severely punished for it. In Sabaody, the train was St. Charlos. He could do nothing and have his crew be safe, or pull the lever to save Camey and avenge Hatchan. He pulled the lever, causing the biggest defeat in the entire series. And immediately after punching Charlos, he says sorry. He realizes he wasn’t thinking clearly, and I think Luffy knew in that moment he just ruined everything. Because in that moment he allowed the Celestial Dragons to restrict his freedom and dictate his actions.
That’s after not learning from his first major low point in the series, his trolly problem in Water-7. In Water-7, when he argued with Usopp over the Merry, Usopp narrowed his vision into 2 options: stick to his decision as captain, or keep the Merry. As highlighted by Zoro, a captain needs to be confident in his decisions and know what he’s doing for the betterment of the crew. And Luffy was told the logic that the Merry could literally not go any farther without breaking in half. But he if chose to keep the Merry, he would also keep Usopp on his crew. The thing is, no one, especially Usopp, was thinking clearly in this moment. Luffy chose his side as a captain and everything went wrong, almost permanently losing Usopp, and then the entire crew.
Post time-skip Luffy develops greatly, because in Whole Cake Island it is highlighted what Luffy should have done with Usopp. He doesn’t pick a side with Sanji, and instead tells Sanji “I cannot become pirate king without you!!!” He did not choose a side, and if he did this with Usopp… that’s all Usopp wanted to hear. To be reassured he was not disposable as a crewmate.
So that’s the beauty of Luffy. That he’s developed so much over the course of 1000 episodes, even when we don’t notice. But Luffy has failed the trolly problem before, and he bounces back to get it right eventually.
@@fromnoononI hope you enjoy my reply above, but it’s that attitude to throw hands that got him in such trouble at Sabaody
@@nii9931 oh man i absolutely LOVE this comment this is incredible thank you so much for taking the time to write this all out. i think you're spot on on everything here and i love how your analysis aligns with my premise. honestly i LOVE the framing of this topic through solely the main character's progression. tbh i may take this and make it into a follow up video - about how luffy's development with trolley problems shows his development as a character
In summary Franky knew the solution to the trolley problem all along. Jump in front of it and turn yourself into a cyborg. Oh, wait, that's the Sea Train Problem. Totally different thing.
General franky was seeing across dimensions and beyond our realm of understanding
Fighting the trolly is how Luffy has always worked. No matter what island or country he's in. He sees the choices the people have been given and says "I'mma just go beat up the person in charge of this"
his attitude is throw hands first, assess trolley problem second
Literally walks into a town in Wano and ask to fight the boss
@@MrRourk the man says “who is the trolley because I have two hands for them”
@fromnoonon same with Nami and her home town. He throws hands with Arlong because he makes Nami cry. He got super pissed when Arlong called Nami a tool
I think the greatest example of this is the Enel situation in Skypeia. After the survival game Enel presents the remaining 5 contestants with options: go with him or die. And everyone present all makes the same choice: "fuck your options YOU die." Rejecting his options and making their own. It's probably one of One Piece's philosophies regarding agency and freedom reminding people that no matter the overwhelming forces against you; you still have options. If there are none present make your own. Reject any options given to you by forces that don't have your best interests in mind.
Oh dude yes I love this parallel. Hadn’t thought of it.
It also makes me think that enel’s game is what Imu is doing with the sinking of the world too.
@@fromnoonon Yeah I have a feeling Imu might lash out once he's exposed. If the survival game hasn't started yet then it will soon if Vegapunk's message sets him off.
@@fromnoononSo I guess to address the world sinking we need to... fight the ocean?
@@char1194 fight Imu
Your dive into Oden's decision made me appreciate the argument between Luffy and Vivi at Alabasta even more.
"People die"
-Monkey D. Luffy
A cold hard fact. Oden did what Vivi tried to do, and play the slow game to potentially extend people's lives. Oden ultimately failed to protect Wano due to this decision. Luffy, not even knowing who Crocodile was or what kind of cunning skill he has decided he should just beat up Crocodile now, based solely on instinct. Luffy's way may (or may not) have had some casualties within the two fighting armies, but at least the country was saved that day.
When I first watched Alabasta I was slightly confused as to what they (Luffy and Vivi) were arguing about. The Oden folly put it into perspective.
Every one: I pull the lever
Straw Hats: I Punch the Trolley
Luffy: i will fight trains
One piece is a story about just pushing the trolley off the tracks rather than having the trolley hit the people on them I guess. No trolley problem if there's no trolley...
Hahah that’s what I should’ve named this video. “No trolly, no problem”
@@fromnoonon But what if there's people inside the trolley as well?!
@Aztonio next time you're gonna tell me there were people aboard the Death Stat as well
@@chingizzhylkybayev8575 😂
that kid decision in the intro was hilarious. love it
the brother/sister different approaches to the trolley problem had me rolling and also weirdly illustrated my point perfectly. 10/10 family
Doflamingo as a baby:
@@thefinnguy500 lol
@@thefinnguy500fr
Baby boy is stone cold 😭
I love the premise that we can fight the trolley. Why would you choose the lesser of two evils when good is an option?
it's having the creativity of approach to reject the premise, and realize problems don't have binary solutions.
Lil man really answered “Maximum carnage!” 😂
Boy saw the problem and said “no survivors”
@@fromnoonon That boy grew up to be Akainu
@@saltedscimitar 😂😂😂
I'd say Robin pulled the lever, then regretted her decision when the Straw Hats convinced her that it would be okay and that they would stop the trolley. Robin didn't solve the problem by rejecting the trolley, she very much embraced the idea of there being no other outcome, it was entirely the Straw Hats that stopped the trolley.
Ohhh this is a great point. She originally actually pulled the lever in alabasta when she told Luffy to let her die honestly. And he ignored that decision. And then again, he ignored her decision in ennies lobby. I do 100% think that by the time Luffy and the gang get to her and he presses her again and again her mind finally opened her mind to rejecting the premise. Because I’d agree that she embraced there being no other outcome, up until the climactic moment of the arc where she changes her perspective and says she wants to live.
Great take thank you so much for this comment
This has never occurred to me, it's just so... beautifully childish, it's the most logical and imaginative way to resolve it, the most human way; the most Luffy way.
I think everyone should approach life by looking at problems and asking “what would Luffy do?”
Then you end up solving your problems by punching them or eating them
@@fromnoonon And so, men head into the wild in pursuit of their dreams! The world has truly entered a great caveman era!
"Oh no, the train is gonna hit either one person or a bunch of people! What do we do?!"
Sabin: "...I'm gonna suplex that train."
"Wait what, you can't just-"
But it was too late, he was already suplexing the train...
🤣🤣🤣
I love how Oda is constently telling us to overthrow the government. Truely a "break the wheel" type of guy xD
He’s so precious thinking that it be best to hit all the toy people 😂
this video made me so so so happy when i found it i was over the moon. him and his sister are so cute
That child is a fan of the “Multi Track Drifting” option
There's only one thing you should have added to this video. When you mention fighting the trolley, you should show either Franky or Yokozuna trying to stop the Sea Train. ITs the perfect physical manifestation of this metaphorical problem and was all I could imagine when you said it.
Hahah I’m glad Im not alone. I kept trying to find the line for that but that scene doesn’t align with the dilemma and I didn’t want to show horn ut. I should’ve addressed the zuneisha in the room though
I love when great videos like this drop and make me fall in love with One Piece all over again. Fantastic work, man. 🤘
Really appreciate the kind words ♥️ I rewatch one piece all the time and starting to make these videos has really given watching it a whole new light. It’s such a simple series but such a complex one at the same time.
What’s your favorite arc so far?
@@fromnoonon Unpopular maybe, but my personal favorite arc has gotta be Fishman Island. The feeling I got when seeing the growth of the Straw Hats after the timeskip combined with the beautiful and rich atmosphere of Fishman Island gave the arc a vibe that I immediately fell in love with. Overhated imo.
I agree with the conclusions
you draw, but they feel incomplete. Robin doesn't choose to pull the lever as much as the straw hats demand to pull it with her. One piece rejects the powerlessness of the victims by allowing them to fight the trolley with the conductor.
Your ability to weave in references, which highlight your overall point, is a testament to your excellent writing and will not go unnoticed.
This is so kind 🥲 thank you so much for this comment it made my day
There's a trolley problem on sabaody. Saint Charlos is about to take both Hachi and Camie, so Saint Charlos is the trolley, and the options are: 1. Try to scape with them or 2. Let the celestial dragon take them.
But Luffy since the beggining saw that the problem was Saint Charlos himself, so he attacked him, putting Luffy and his crew in danger but saving Hachi and Camie
this is a great catch! since publishing this video so many people have shown great examples of ones i missed
no one has to die...... few chapters later...
ace: am i joke to you?!
hahahah shit! the narrative said a big F you to me with that one
Nice to see hom solve it.
He doesn't need ethics, just morals.
and fists
My solution was always stop the trolly by knocking it over or something. I didn't realize one piece had the same stance.
That’s at least how I have understood it!!!
Ahh, in Spider-Man 1, Peter is pushed by Green Goblin to choose between Mary Jane and a bunch of kids...in a trolley. Well I'll be damned.
Never realized it.
i remember that as the first time i was ever like "oh thats literally a trolley problem"!
Made me smile as if a DON sound effect came with it, like I was facing a new dawn, like color slowly taking over a gray world of moral ambiguity.
Then again, this video made me realize the trolley is likely to have passengers. That, regardless of the choice, the "clash" of A and B or A and C will likely be inevitable. Self-sacrifice might be optional.
The power posits that the trolley is coming, and that context steers a choice.
The very second one is demanded a choice, one should realize the trap he is being set up in - a system built by the demander's definition, and rise up against the demander. It's not the fault of either party they were tied up in the tracks. It's not relevant whether the trolley's passengers like the ride or not. Self-sacrifice from one might be demanded. You fight the trolley.
Awesome. Awesome video.
Oda. Damn.
dude. this is like the nicest comment anyone has ever left me. legit have me crying in the club rn thank you SO SO MUCH
That DON. Reminded me of Franky master, TOM. That guy also had some good dilemas and choices in the manga.
I think he chose to pull the lever, but in the he reject it all.
One Piece really is a series about a groupd of people who are given two unfair choices, and then choose to beat up the person giving the choices instead if making one. The most effective way to avoid injustice is to address the source of the injustice, not play along.
exactly :)
Can't wait to get to the Trolley arc in OP
You will never get to the trolley problem arc if you keep watching at a den den mushi’s pace! Or I’m going to keep making One Piece videos so you feel left out
It is between Water 7 and Enies Lobby.
Wait does Oden have the power to finish off Kaido when he returned? As far as I remember, Kaido was pretty much unbeatable by anyone not of Yonko or Admiral power in that time period. The best Oden could do was scar Kaido. So even if Oden fought to the end he probably wouldn't have killed Kaido, he would have died and possibly all of the scabbards would have died in battle with him, and Wano would still be enslaved.
The best case scenario if Oden fought the metaphorical Kaido trolley is that his death wouldn't be boiling and he convinces the scabbards to leave him, leading to the cascading events that lead to where we ultimately end up in the canon story. The only major difference being how Oden died.
Overall the video is a pretty good overview on the trolley problem presented in One Piece. The issue isn't which to sacrifice, but to punch the ever living hell out of the trolley. There isn't just two options most of the time, it just takes a bit of creativity and some power to find an alternative solution.
the oden one is interesting. i'm not sure if he would've won that 1:!, kaido certainly seemed to think it was possible oden could've defeated him. would he have actually won though? hard to say. but even beyond that, oden could have called on whitebeard or roger to help him. i mean roger owed oden big time as it were. my point with that example in connection to the larger idea was basically that oden outright excepted the premise of the situation presented to him by oden/orochi instead of thinking he could overcome it like luffy essentially did in the wano arc
i really appreciate your comment and kind words! thanks so much for taking the time to watch and give me your thoughts on it
@@fromnoonon Oh, you make a fantastic point about Oden not calling Roger or Whitebeard for assistance. It does seem like an oversight. I know Roger and Whitebeard don't need to be fully Luffy like and drop everything to help Oden, but you're right you would think they would lend a hand at least. Maybe the complete isolationism of Wano had something to do with it? The lack of information coming out of Wano? But you could argue Whitebeard would have some form of intelligence network keeping tabs on powerful people like Kaido, right? So he would at least have an idea that Kaido may be targeting Wano. Then he maybe notifies Roger about Wano? Yeah, I got no idea why Oda couldn't have Oden ask for help or why Whitebeard couldn't know Kaido's movements.
Beyond that whole conundrum, yes, I do see that you were contrasting Luffy and Oden's decisions in regards to the Kaido trolley. I enjoyed the video greatly, I appreciated your deconstruction of story events to show how it can fit the mold of the trolley problem and how Oda finds alternative solutions to the trolley.
@@Deode-d4h yeah i think the whitebeard thing is a huge oversight. even if he knew, he may not do anything until oden asks. but if oden got the squad together they couldve whooped kaido easy.
again,. thanks! really appreciate all the comments and the constructive feedback and thoughts on everything!!!
The trolley example was never posed as a problem. The philosophy professor who came up with it was making the point that we should always seek the welfare of the many.
exactly. its a misnomer to call it a problem. its an ethical dilemma that doesnt have an anwer like that. its a thought experiment
Great video. Really enjoy the concept and the type of conversation it leads.
Thanks so much it means a lot getting comments like this! These are my favorite types of videos to make. What's your favorite arc in one piece?
So the solution: Balance the lever in between the two sides and watch as the trolley crashes into the split in the track
thats how you get trains to drift
Derail the trolley has always been my answer.
That’s why you love one piece
Oden didn't pull the lever.
Depends on the framing!
Trolley problems are certainly a way to manipulate people. I do customer service and a client brought back a trailer late. They gave me a "choice" to either lock the trailer themselves (expecting me to give in and give them the lock) or that I would have to lock the trailer, disregarding the services being closed. I chose to not lock the trailer and not give them the lock, letting them return the next day or leave the trailer unlocked on the terrain. What I know now is that the trailer was still their responsibility and if it was stolen that night even on the company's terrain, it would have been their responsibility, since the services to officialise the return were closed. Then again, they were fighting the trolley of company guidelines.
its really funny that you mentioned the good place because this is ta simular conclusion they came to, although theirs was self sacrife take the trolley off the track and in doing so sacrife yourself.
good video
thank you! i loved that show so much and it really made me think about how media interacts with these topics differently
Great analysis and conclusion! A few people below said that Luffy does get punished sometimes for his decision to fight the trolley, this in my view just emphasizes the importance and weight of Luffys decision. Yes, he won't always be able to destroy the trolly but if he didn't try he would be leaving it on the tracks to potentially kill even more people. The solution isn't destroying the trolley but trying to destroy it, inspiring others to do the same, something Oda shows greatly through the concept of inherited will. The solution is getting to the core question of What made the trolley?, every single time such a dilemma occurs, and Luffy does.
dude yes! exactly. luffy doesnt always win, but its not always about winning that battle. lose the battle, win the war type stuff tbh.
your comments are awesome ty so much my friend
This strikes me as a strange way to redefine the trolley dilemma. The trolley itself isn't those things you mentioned. The trolley is the impact of your decision to act or not act. It's literally unavoidable unless you are incapacitated. You can't really reject the trolley dilemma because you have to choose to act or not act, and that decision will always have an impact. The trolley dilemma isn't about right or wrong; it's a thought experiment that can tell us something about what we as individuals value depending on what you put on the tracks. You put human lives there, you find out how the individual values a single human life against multiple when they believe the outcome is certain. In reality, though, the outcomes of our decisions are rarely so certain, so it has little practical application.
Your argument is that we should reject the idea of making a decision by deciding not to decide? It feels like you're conflating the trolley dilemma with being presented with an ultimatum. But the trolley dilemma doesn't give you an external factor to rail against. There is no entity that set up the situation for you to challenge or blame. Because it's about the fact that you have to make decisions in life and that those always have consequences. The situations you described in One Piece are of characters being presented with ultimatums. There is an entity that created the situation that can be challenged, thus the ultimatum and the idea that there is a binary choice can be challenged. But the trolley dilemma is truly binary because the choices are action or inaction.
well, yes. you're right but also a bit wrong. because the trolley problem is an ethical dilemma that's inherently a hypothetical and not based on real circumstance. part of the purpose of this video is showing that when you apply ethical dilemma hypotheticals into the real world they dont fit cleanly. when you present a trolley problem to luffy he rejects the premise, because he can. hypotheticals dont work irl and it shows when you start doing these exercises.
you're right, but also missing part of the point
my argument was that luffy wasn't actually presented with any trolley dilemmas. he's presented with ultimatums. the trolley dilemma doesn't need to be based on real circumstances because it's not about whether the decision you make is right or wrong. and i'm pretty sure i covered that it's not realistic because we can rarely ever be so certain about the consequences of our actions.
you seem to be missing my point.
Luffy represents anarchy more specifically the good parts.
This is the point I wish I would’ve come to in my ‘one piece made me a revolutionary’ video tbh.
Anarchy yes and no, it dose help when you live in a world were punching solves problems.
In truth his farther is the Anarcist
Luffy Is A Pirate.
@@MouseGoat yes this is a good distinction. love it, bc i agree with anarchy but it isnt quite right. he just wants freedom
"Pull the Lever Kronk!"
"WROOONG LEEVEERRRR!!!"
This is such a great video man congrats, keep it up!
Thank you so much! Comments like this mean the world to me man
"Fighting the trolley" has a certain chance of success and results in no one dying if it succeeds or 5 people dying if it doesn't. You're not "solving" anything, you're just distracting from the core question by adding a probability question on top.
But you’re approaching this from a real world perspective instead of a fictional universe. This isn’t a philosophical answer that is applicable to our world, but it’s how the trolley problem is solved in the one piece universe
And you’re surrendering to preordained notions and inevitability if you do.
Why accept an ultimatum? Is the source invincible, immovable? No? Then nothing gets solved until you confront it. You’re not making a true choice, you’re just selecting the options presented before you as immutable.
Someone _will_ die if you don’t do anything about the trolley. But you have a chance to save _everyone_ if you have some stones and try to derail that goddamn train.
I remember the first time learning about this and thought it was so stupid because why would someone choose to kill more people then less people??? But it’s interesting thinking of it in one piece. Does the anime really say to never kill? I don’t know :D I work with computers not philosophy
well i think something that's an underlying point of this issue is that in conflict or war, people will get hurt. like luffy said to vivi in alabasta. so i dont think the dilemma itself is dumb - its a product of reality. but i do think oda compels us to not accept the situations we're in and look at the premise of these "problems" to see if we can reject them at all. the choice in dealing with problems isnt always as binary as we think it is
A few months ago, I was catching up to One Piece at the same time a friend was playing through The Telltale Walking Dead games.
In trying to explain to my friend why I hated those games, I brought up this exact thing: they present you with a trolley problem over and over and over again, and theres so solution that involves destroying the trolley. I related it to One Piece and how Luffy wouldn't accept the tragedy that comes with the decisions Telltale expects you to make.
Excited to see someone else come to the exact same conclusions!
The trolley... The machine... The story is of revolution
Yes! It is a direct allegory for me about our choices as individuals under oppressive regimes
As a trolly meme enjoyer. I expect something absurd, violent, and over the top as the solution. Nothing else is acceptable.
*THERE WAS NO KINGDOM OF LULUSIA!*
1:58 Rob Lucci's answer to the trolley problem
🤣🤣🤣 im ded
2 track powerslide
Get em all
Sengoku didn't order the destruction of Ohara, the 5 Elders did.
you might be right but thats not whats said in the story
Sengoku is the one who gave permission of a buster call. Sengoku gave them the golden denden mushi, if he didn't gave permission, they will not be allowed to use that.
@@erwindavid2859 thank you! people keep saying he didnt allow it and im like.. did we watch the same show?
No one has to answer a hypothetical situation meant to explore morals and philosophy. The ends never justify means. Systems over goals.
OK wow this one was much better than expected !!
There’s a train barreling down the tracks. On the course it’s on, I will take this comment as a compliment. However, if my brain decides to do a madness and I pull the lever I will take this compliment as a slight. What should I do?
But fr thank you for the comment and watching! Had a ton of fun making this video. Also love rosinante ❤️
Living in the philippines, a third world country, where the people think a corrupt government is the only way of life is miserable; they have the option to choose better people or better yet support in the effort to make the change happen.
It's tragic to see a country take for granted the democracy it fought for throughout it's history
My family is from a similar country and it’s always crazy to me when I visit, how much people just accept it
"Fighting the trolly" is the most One PIece thing ive ever heard
It’s so franky coded
Great video, you deserve more subscribers! Man what an incredible show.
♥️ you are a mensch thank you so much for the compliment! Slowly but surely if I keep making good content it’ll happen. I just really like making videos and talking about anime so even if I don’t have followers I love doing it!
PLEASE STOP RECOMMENDING ME ONE PIECE CONTENT THAT GOES FAST THRILLER BARK
The flashbacks may be drawn out, but them being there isn't bad. It's good to reference them to show just what the characters are thinking.
Yes absolutely and I should’ve clarified. In a lot of ways I meant the thing that happens in an episode where they spend 5-10 min showing what happened in the last three episodes. That’s an issue of episodic content more than just one piece tho
the thing with this is that i wonder if oda ever even thought about this??? you are probably right with all this but do you think he ever thought about it
hmmm. I don't know. my guess would be that he didnt think about it this way - like he never set out to create an anime scene or arc which tackles the issue of the trolley problem. but maybe he used a basis in philosophy to write the story.
more than anything, i think the trolley problem is so applicable to human morality and conflict that it pops up again and again and again in literature
He definitely thought about it. Maybe not in this way specifically, but Oda has a ton of storytelling patterns within the story with repeating themes. An example of this is the Frankenstein’s Monster story. We see it in Chopper, Franky, Oars, Kuma, etc.
This entire series is about choice and the results actions have. In the SBS Oda even literally drew two different versions of the future of each main character. He had a good timeline and a bad timeline. Ideally these changes happened based on choices. Joyboy lost his world based on a choice. Ace, before he died, made a choice. Garp wanted Luffy to be a Marine, but Luffy made a choice to become a pirate. Vivi had a choice to become a pirate or remain a Princess.
I actually think Luffy as the chosen one is an interesting concept because he seems like the type to reject being a hero or having a destiny since all he wants is freedom and he doesn’t want to be a hero. But circumstances have led him in embracing that role more and more, specifically with Wano.
@@doronrosstuvia3489 oh dude you gotta watch my video on if luffy is a hero or not you are going to love it th-cam.com/video/OtyyA5npUGU/w-d-xo.html
Luffy says he's not a hero, because he won't share his meat.
And yeah, it's dumb and silly, but take it apart and you see: He defines heroism by sacrifice.
And Luffy doesn't sacrifice. He will not accept a choice between two things he wants, he will go "No, gimme both."
And so, Luffy believes he isn't a hero, because he will help Everyone he wants to save and protect.
He realizes his ideals aren’t heroic. He is just a good person, but he doesn’t care about that
The third answer. In every seaming duality there exists a third choice that you can only find by rejecting the given options.
boy you get me
It's interesting to compare these scenes to the classic trolley problem, but I just don't think it really applies in most of these cases.
In Sengoku's case, we don't know if his decision actually would have "averted" destiny because his orders were not followed through. Sengoku may have pulled the lever first, but Jaguar and to an even greater extent Kuzan "pulled the lever back". Kuzan especially had at LEAST 3 separate chances, and is the real lever puller in all this.
Oden's "trolley" is a bit more of a classic case, and even Kaido chastises him as much when Oden goes to slay him later, but I think it's important to remember the context when Oden made that decision: he had literally JUST tried to slay Orochi, and was stopped by one of those most broken fruits in OP: the barrier fruit. Remember that Oden has demonstrated upper echelon level haki (enough to survive scrapes with Whitebeard and Roger), and his attacks just bounced right off that ridiculous barrier. Fighting them openly right then and there would've meant people dying as he banded together his samurai and somehow overcoming that fruit. Was he naive for not pretending to agree and instead planning a sneak attack (which he half does later but was foiled by the spy)? Sure, but honor is a two-edged sword ironically, and he would've had to throw away his honor to do what needed to be done, which is why morality is not so simple. I also think it's not quite fair to put all this on Oden either.... he was one guy. One very strong guy, but still just one guy. Where the hell is the rest of the leadership during all this? In this case, it'd be more accurate to say the entire country of Wano pulled the lever, and that's why it fell.
As you said, Robin's "trolley" is even more complex, where she chooses her own death over that of her crewmates, because she (as well as most of the world) thought the government (the trolley) could not BE beaten. So there's kinda two trolleys going on at the same time, the imminent threat to the Straw Hat crew, and the far off one with the 800 year void information potentially causing global destabilization. That said, Robin's "lever pull" moment doesn't really fit the trolley I think, since in that moment, the crew had already been through hell and were literally standing in deep enemy territory before her eyes, what was she gonna do? Say "Nah I'm good" and the Straw Hats grumble, pack up and go home? The Rubicon was long passed by that point, I think that very powerful scene more illustrates her own internal struggle with her extremely deep-seated trauma.
The trolley problem is intended to illustrate "Greater Good" philosophical thinking, but I think One Piece does a pretty good job of pointing out what a dangerous way of thinking it is, because trolley problem operates on two assumptions being always true: 1) the trolley cannot be stopped in time 2) the trolley must choose between the paths with people on them. We see this time and time again where the heroes stop the unstoppable. It's nice when you can just punch the trolley and the problem goes away, but it's important to remember that not every trolley can be fought.
*points at Marineford war to save Ace*
But hey, it's Anime, it'd be depressing if every trolley was realistic.
thank you so much for this comment, it's so well thought out and articulated and honestly i deeply agree with you here. the trolley problem itself isnt a real world problem, and it definitely doesnt have a hard answer. its a dilemma, an ethical metaphor to make people think about moral choices in crisis. and the examples i chose are anything but a 1:1 with the problem from a philosophical or irl perspective too
thats part of why my conclusion with how one piece approaches this dilemma is to reject the premise. its an anime and we're talking about a hypothetical moral dilemma within this fictional universe - they have the power to reject the premise entirely!
There is no modicum of meaningful control with the one at the lever, therefore there is no meaningful moral dilemma. The pressure of immediate decision making is implied, but standing around and doing nothing or throwing the lever because it's the quicker choice to a better outcome is morally grey at best. If you have the time to do one thing, attcking the heart of the problem no matter how hard it is is always a better than just standing there. And the fool who insists of the moral laziness of the subject is amoral.
A better modernized approach is a doctor is presented with a prior diagnosis of a transferred patient, which is exhibiting two distinct symptoms. The doctor can perscribe one of two medicines; they are highly risky, if not lethal, when both are present in the patient, but will treat the one of the symptoms successfully at the neglect of the other. Both symptoms are serious and will likely devolve into a life threatening if left unchecked. What is the right move?
In choosing one of the two, the doctor has failed to make the correct choice. Treating the symptoms of the disease and not the disease itself if and when the means are available means choosing a deliberately worse option at the expense of the patient. Being limited by artificial choices is not how we advance as a species, be it moral or scientific.
So incredibly well said! Great comment here
That kid a menace 😂🤣
Kid said “perish”
2:09 future celestial dragon right here. He is gonna make it on the Red Line
Dunno how you ended up on my landing page but i rly enjoyed the video. Take my thumbs up and my abo! :D
(Sorry for some english mistakes I'm gonna make. I'm not a native english speaker^^ )
One piece is an awesome story and it teaches us alot about the real world without mentioning it once. For example we face the question if it right to overthrow a system multiple times in the story from different points of view. In Arabasta we saw ppl who took their right to fight for there freedom and wealth while on the other side the soldiers of the king fought for that exact same reason. Both sides fought to stabilize their country. Both sides wanted to archive the best for all of them; including their enemies. None of those sides knew that there was a 3rd force hidden in the shadows. The person who orchestrated the whole war. The next time we see this problem is already the very next arc. We faced the overthrowing of systematic believes by noland which turned out to be a good thing for the ppl but a bad thing for noland himself. We also had in the very same arc a premise what would had happen if crocodile would have won there. Embodied by Enel. We saw both sides would still fight each other, while both are afraid of the 3rd force now. Basically teaching us to look for connections with others and to face the real thread. We saw something like that during WW2. The allies teamed up with the former and later enemy of russia to fight the third force which was germany. Moving on we had alot of stuff which was more like small riots to the system overall which turned out to be the paramount war, but right after the timeskip we had FMI.
We faced again the premise of two sides clashing and one stand next to it. This time around we had fishmen vs fishmen. The progressive fishmen who wanted to overcome their own racism vs the fishmen who wanted to hold on this very racism because this racism formed them. The third force here was mankind itself. It formed this racism but also some of It's people were far enought to overcome this very racism. So the weak people of mankind joined forces with the racist fishmen. (Not voluntary, but it happend.) The strong people joined forces with the fishmen who wanted to overcome this stupid racism. In that the overthrow of the system would have been a disaster for all. So the system won.
On Dressrosa we saw again two sides clashing and this time around the system was corrupt. It had disasterous flaws. You needed to check your own privilege by taking a closer look to the problems. This was cleverly solved by sugars df ability. We also got a 2nd scenario what would have happend if corcodile won. This time around we just had 2 parties envolved by the outcome. Ppl who fought for their freedom and the reigning Don Quichotte family who took their freedom. Sometimes we don't see that our freedom was taken since our feeling of wealth was good. This is also a systematic problem that exists all over the world.
Oda is telling us the story of different outcomes of the very same scenario with shifted conditions.
Sorry for my long comment :3
dude do NOT apologize i absolutely love this comment!!! and your english is very very good.
i have a video that's directly about this that I think you'd really like: th-cam.com/video/SjcnKmdDxvQ/w-d-xo.html
@@fromnoonon yeah but i used the german short term for subscription instead of sub :D
Lil dude is definitely a Gorosei at heart. 😂
Hahahah that’s baby doflamingo
Robins situation wasnt a trolley problem. Luffy already declared war on the World Government, essentially forcing the lever to be pulled.
i disagree! she was both on the tracks and had control of the lever. she was letting it continue towards her until her pivotal "i want to live" scene
@@fromnoonon Luffy already declared war on the World government by burning the flag.
He actively essentially broke the trolley.
He might not look like it, but when its important he is a social mastermind. He saw right through Nami's lies (Aarlong Park), Robin's lies (W7/EL), Sanjis lies (WCI) and made friends of Bon Kurei and Bellamy - one being an awesome guy who got into a criminal organization somehow and the other being a hard working guy admiring the wrong people. Noone else would have noticed any of that.
this reminds me a lot of Kirk doing the Kobayashi Maru
Yeah honestly that’s a super good connection
Well put! The trolley problem is almost always a false dichotomy!
this is one of my favorite videos ever i think
This is undoubtedly my favorite comment ever
Sengoku wasnt fleet admiral during Ohara. The ones that ordered the Buster Call were the Gorosei.
Ohara's fate was already decided.
Its exactly why Vegapunk recorded his message.
There is no trolley when it comes to Imu.
Either you die or fight back.
But the WG is an entity so powerful, even fighting back is bound to cause death and misery
that's not necessarily correct, although it is slightly more ambiguous about who ordered it than i let on. but its direct that sengoku was the one who ordered saul to lead the buster call
@@fromnoonon i think Kong was still in charge. In fact, Ohara and Roger's execution gave him the promotion to commander in chief
@@unnamedshadow1866 hmm you could be right. i know sengoku was the one actually at ohara in charge, but kong couldve been the one who gave the order. my bad
I think people get a lot about luffy wrong. The only reason luffy would fight the trolly at all is because the entire trolley problem implies the one tied in the tracks alone is someone dear to you. If luffy didn't know anyone in the tracks he might not even try to save anyone. He's not a hero, he only saves people who he considers friends or gave him food or something. He'd never even went against Doflamingo if not for law's plans.
Yep exactly! Maybe I didn’t articulate it right but I agree 100%. I have a whole other video about Luffy as a hero or not that I think you’d love
The trolly problem has always seemed like a bullshit philosophical question to me. Because most of the time we are not talking about the actual trolly problem where it's 1 life VS many with a timer counting down, and in that case you always sacrifice the one. Marines deal with too many MIGHTS for it to even be close to considered an actual trolly problem, not to mention how much more damage they do just by getting involved. In the case of Sengoku he chose what he chose knowing it was wrong, knowing it was bullshit propoganda, there was no tough decision because no one was going to die before the marines interfered so saying it's a trolly problem is wrong. Same with all the other instances. Oden's decision was a decision made on the spot that effects many people, HOWEVER it's still not a trolly problem because he thought all he was sacrificing was his pride and throne not an actual life. The trolly problem has always been a bullshit question that isn't even that deep or philosophical cause unless you're a mass murder wanting to kill more people, you always chose the 1 because in an actual trolly problem there is no other choice for anyone.
Yeah I agree with this. I mean it’s intentionally not supposed to an answer and is a dilemma. But the context matters
The true Conquers in One Piece Luffy, Roger, and Whitebeard always sacrifices the many to save the few whereas the evil Marines like Pre-Timeskip Sengoku claims to sacrifice the few for the many, so true Conquers like Whitebeard, Luffy, and Roger would either destroy the trolly itself, or Luffy's case in Enies Lobby pulled the lever to sacrifice the many for the few, so you wouldn't develop the mindset of a Conquer with your way of thinking.
@@RoronoaZoro-ur6hr No one was ever sacrificed. Luffy never chooses to sacrifice anyone. Enies Lobby was about saving one friend from from people CLAIMING she would destroy the world but would have used Robin's knowledge to destroy many. Robin herself would never have destroyed anyone. So in the end Luffy saved more lives because he fought a war against the biggest group of murderers in the world. The world government always sacrifices many to save their own self interests, Same with Ace and Whitebeard and Rodger. None of them went in thinking they will sacrifice anyone. That's the flaw in your logic.
Great video, really enjoyed it. Not trying to be "that guy", but doesn't the Gorosei order the Buster Call?
No it’s valid! A few people have brought this up. It’s mentioned briefly in Ennies Lobby that it was the fleet admiral who ordered Ohara and at the time it was sengoku I believe so I did maybe draw that one out a bit
Now I'm wondering if the train scene in Franky's flashback of him trying to stop the puffing tom was an intentional visual metaphor for the trolley problem 🤔
I was wondering the same thing as I edited this. I couldn’t make the parallel fit right in my head but that’s not to say it isn’t true. But so many of these comments have pointed out tons of instances of the trolley problem in one piece I didn’t mention I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s something there, at least as a visual metaphor
Little gurl: pacifist road
Little boi: genocide road
It’s get to make sure your kids are used to challenge runs at a young age I think
The correct solution of stopping the trolley reminds me of what Captain Kirk did with the Kobayashi Maru test. Instead of facing a no win situation he changed the conditions of the test.
That is not how the trolly problem works but I guess it is a good mind game. In the trolly problem you only have those two option since you are a person standing next to the switch. You pushing off the trolly is not an option (well it is, when you want to die with the other people), since one person can´t move a multiple 100kg 40km/h trolly off the tracks.
But a little funfact, if the trolly is faster than 40 km/h and it goes over the junction it most probably derails giving you the option of random killing all, half or none :D
Hahah that is good to know the next time im in this scenario! But in reality, the trolley problem isn’t a real problem at all. It’s an ethical dilemma that’s always hypothetical. So applying it to anything actually deterministic is a bit of a round peg square hole situation
My favorite thing about Ohara is Aokiji lets one perspn go and the story goes on to prove he was wrong for doing so, by ruining an entire country and likely killing wsy more than Ohara.
Or right! It’s a matter of perspective ultimately
I very much agree with the conclusion that this video comes to that fighting the trolly is the solution to the trolly problem. However, I don't think that One Piece fully supports this idea. Take the Ohara situation for example. The knowledge of the people there had the potential to cause the death of many people in the world. When the Navy decided to destroy Ohara, they weren't allowing that threat to destroy only one island to keep the rest of the world safe, they were actively destroying the island to prevent the threat itself. They decided to fight the train that was the Ohara people and the risk they provided to the rest of the world. And I think we would both agree that this is the wrong thing to do.
In the Wanno situation, it really isn't a trolly problem at all, because the people were always going to be enslaved no matter what Oden did. It's more like a situation where a trolly is going down tracks at a group of people and you can decide to do a silly dance or not before you do anything. Also, Oden did fight the trolly, which caused the death of many samurai and many civilians when he failed. We can argue that Oden should have fought at the beginning, but he didn't have the support of the Akazaya Nine and he didn't know that Kaido was going to get stronger at a pace faster than he was.
Ohhh you know what man this is so interesting and something I wish I thought to discuss in this video. Like I agree and disagree with you because it feels like ultimately this is about perspective.
Your take on ohara you flipped how I set the premise on its head a bit, making the train the knowledge they had learned instead of it being the use of force itself. Honestly I kind of like that perspective more, I think it offers a more direct look at how the situation fits into this context.
Thanks for the comment. Gave me a lot to think about.
Oden should’ve fought because they would’ve came to support him. The World Government situation isn’t really a trolley because the Elders/WG don’t care about Ohara in reality.
So basically, applying this to modern society, we need to stop enabling corruption and we need to fight it head on.
Hell yes 👊
Franky actually fights the train
I know and i tried to find the line on this for so long but ultimately that sequence just didn’t fit in to this dilemma. Maybe I should’ve made a section addressing that itself lol
a thought i had not that long ago is why hero's don't trade lives, because if saving some puts some else in danger than you just need to save them too there actions dont need to stop after one heroic deed.
the ends justify the means arguments are always wrong because there is no end, the world will keep spinning and life will go on so all that is left is the terrible actions to arrive at a desired point for only a short while that's why even if they do is immeasurable good when that good ends you are back where you started but now a monster
You are cooking here
Sengoku wasn't the one who instructed the buster call on Ohara though. It was the elders and Spandam's dad who issued the call.
ohara was in Kong`s responsibilities, not Sengoku. Sengoku was an admiral
A buster call can be ordered by the fleet admiral (sengoku), the head of the navy (kong) or the five elders
The kid's decision to put the safe person onto the other track to make sure all 6 were hit brings up a new ethical dilemma. Is he now responsible for one death but innocent of the other 5, because he killed them through inaction, or did he take responsibility for all 6 because he did take action in the overall situation?
My own take is that by moving the other person he made taking the alternate track into a clear solution instead of a dilemma. He may not have directly killed the other 5 but it is at least negligent homicide because his inaction is no longer justifiable on the grounds of not wanting to choose who dies.
In a legal view the 5 would count as felony murders because they died during the commission of the murder of the 6th person.
Hahahah I don’t have a strong opinion but I have a lot of love for you for writing this all out
The oversimplified narrative that bad pacing was an artistic choice by a single individual is really poppin off
Sometimes dumb jokes get more play than they should unfortunately. My videos fall in that category
@@fromnoonon Nah, you're good. I really liked the video! Its just a narrative I've seen in reactor communities with such prevalence recently that it makes me feel like people forget the circumstances surrounding why its the case. People tend to look at arcs like Baratie with rose tinted glasses despite it being one of the most poorly paced arcs in the series and then they simultaneously hate arcs like LRLL despite it being paced better than average arcs and being a ton of fun even with 4 of its episodes being anime cannon. It makes me sad because these narratives are pushed at new fans and it biases them when they may have just enjoyed the things that are stigmatized to be "bad".
Akainu be like: "This Nicolas kid has some good ideas."
Luffy be like: "This Nora kid has some good ideas."
The answer I gave my mom at about 15 when she discussed this stuff with me (she was taking an ethics class for a master's at the time) and my answer was to find a way to derail the train. I couldn't get why that frustrated her.
I think there was another i could think of to do with oden
When he returned to Wano with Roger to get the poneglyth, he knew that Wano was spiralling into a darker place but he choose to stay ignorant of the problem so he could fulfil his duty to guide roger to Laugh tail
This i think's interesting because it was an example of just ignoring it, letting the trolley persist and leaving the lever.
But again, like all the other examples, its not that simple. It wasn't as simple as just "leave Wano or fight against the big bad" Staying with roger was world changing, outside of Wano finding the one piece shook the world and created a new era (infact it may have even been the reason luffy became a pirate) So with this in mind, the trolley problem changes.
It's no longer a matter of one side of the tracks Wano's future, the other side go with Rogger. Because thurther down the line is so much more then just Wano
Originally Rogger was the one person on the track and Wano was a country. But in retrospect Oden leaving Wano even if he could have stopped all the bad things that happened to Wano, he saved the whole world that lay after
On the surface it looks simple, stay in Wano pull the lever. But when you add the context you realise its not just staying with roger, its shaping the new world
So in a sense, Odens choice to do nothing when he first confronted Wano was pulling the lever to save the world that lay after, sacrificing Wano.
A realy tough choice.
Final Fantasy taught me I should suplex the trolley.
Chainsaw Man solved the trolley problem in just allowing the trolley to takes its course and save s cat xD
I’d ignore every trolley for a cat
There is a trolly that will run over my hand before it hits the sub button, but if you pull a lever, the trolly will, instead, careen into my other hand that was going to hit the like button. Do you pull the lever?
If I was faced with a scenario like this, I fear that this would be my ass th-cam.com/video/-2Urx_hPAFU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=pPW2viW--yp7L6EH
One issue with the video, Sengoku was not the one responsible for the buster call or sending Spandine to Ohara
That was the work of the 5 elders.
Fighting the trolly doesn’t fix the problem it’s a cop out that doesn’t do anything
You don’t solve the trolley problem by beating it and making no sacrifices that’s a fantasy you solve it by deciding how it must be solved
you have completely missed the point of the trolley problem, even as stated by the people who first developed it
True shit Luffy would not pull the lever He would punch the train or the railroad
The Trolley Problem is in truth not a problem of choice but a problem of accepting the premise that is only 2 options
you f*cking get it man. the real trolley problem is whether you accept the premise of the problem or not
I would say that Robin didn’t pull the lever and turn the world govt at her friends, because Luffy by design aimed the world govt at himself. His ploy was, we picked a fight with them, and since that was your one fear about staying with us, that’s no longer an excuse. Now tell us how you really feel. Again Luffy broke the problem, because at every chance Robin chooses to turn the trolley away from the Straw Hats and Luffy says “I’ll just stand on the tracks anyway, this collision is going to happen and we won’t lose to it either, so believe in us.”
It’s as if, the trolley is turned from the five people to the one person, and now it’s on a collision course on that path, and the five jump on the other track in front of the one.
He's a magical fighting crackhead. What'd you expect lmao
I love my stretchy crackhead
We literally learn this in every fight Luffy is in. Every single opponent insists on trying to reason with him, trying to give him options, but all of them with their plans and their goals fail to realize that you can’t reason with a magical fighting crackhead who only thinks based on instinct, and will either eat, sleep, drink or fight and most of those options don’t really apply to dealing with villains outside of fighting and maybe possibly sleeping if Zoro is there to take over.
Luffy isn’t smart, he’s lucky. He does whatever he wants to do, and it just so happens that what he wants to do is usually a good thing (aside from eating the entire food supply), it’s pure coincidence. You can’t force a philosophical problem on him because he’ll probably take a ride in the trolley, rescue the people on the tracks just because they’re in the way, and probably overthrow the local government while he’s at it.
The real answer to the Trolley Problem is to build trolleys with better brakes.
Hahah I love that. I wonder how I could’ve used that metaphor
@@fromnoonon It isn't a bad one, but if you go further into this topic, it might be a good idea to discuss how dishonest people use the Trolley Problem to make honest people do awful things. Sengoku was tricked into choosing the "least terrible" option, but it is turning out that the world order he was protecting was built on lies and concealing horrible secrets, and deserved to be taken down no matter the consequences. Oden thought that by taking Kaido's deal he'd be saving Wano from a terrible fate, only for Kaido to have never intended to keep his word and to turn Wano into a place worse than hell. Nico Robin was convinced to turn herself in for the sake of her friends, but it the revelations of recent chapters are anything to go by the knowledge she has will be critical to saving all of them, if not the entire world, from an upcoming apocalypse.
To give you a metaphor, when dishonest people give you a trolley problem, they don't tell you that the track with one person leads to a nuclear reactor, and the trolley is full of high explosives so switching to the track with one person will have far more casualties than the one with just five people. The trolley problem assumes a situation in a vacuum, that there will be no more consequences beyond just the "5 or 1", and honest people will take that at face value. That's why dishonest people love it so very much: You can convince good, kind, and honest people to commit horrible atrocities if you present the trolley problem in just the right way.
None of these are Trolley Problems.
The philosophical question is, can you justify purposefully killing someone if doing so saves the lives of more other people? The intent is important here. It’s a question of responsibility, not numbers. The point of the situation is that more people WILL die if you choose not to interact with it. But if you do get involved, you can only save those people if you personally directly kill someone else.
Sengoku *thought* he was engaging in a trolley problem, because he believed that if the knowledge of Ohara got out (which would happen on its own if he did not intervene) would cause many more deaths by destabilizing the world. Within this framework, he made the call that he thought meant saving more people.
The problem is that he was wrong. It was never actually a trolley problem, and things would have worked out for the better had he not intervened.