ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- Subscribe ♪ ~ ᕕ(ᐛ)ᕗ bit.ly/DanPlanS...
Do you know the trolley car riddle? Where you must choose between 5 people or 1 person on a railroad track. Well, today we're going more in-depth than any other youtube videos I've seen so far. Exploring the fat man dilemma, the doctor, and organ transplant surgeon dilemma.
Professor Michael Sandel from Harvard University asked new law students whether morality is a real thing. He asked them whether the idea of totalitarianism is sound or do the methods in which you achieve them matter.
Professor Michael Sandel teaches courses on justice, societal philosophy and other amazing courses you should check out. Its all online for free and all the questions I ask are from his lectures at Harvard. The amount of philosophy that's embedded in the trolley car dilemma is absolutely insane.
Harvard Courses: justiceharvard.org
Time:
0:18 Trolley Car Riddle: If you were a trolley car operator, would you change your lane to kill 1 person instead of 5?
1:16 Fat Man Dilemma: If you were outside of the trolley car and the same situation happened, would you push a fat man onto the tracks to stop the car?
3:08 Doctor Dilemma: If you were a doctor and 5 mildly injured patients with 1 severely injured patient come, who would you save?
3:46 Surgeon Dilemma: Would you steal five organs from one innocent man to save five patients?
Dan Plan ♪ ~ ᕕ(ᐛ)ᕗ
Our Discord: / discord
By The Way Series: • By the way, The Condom...
Our Facebook Page: / danplanb
Our Twitter Page: / danplanb
"By the way, are you a good person?"
Why's Hosuh here? Of course he is
Yeah man hosuh is so innocent and cute
@@foof5695 i know!!!!
@@foof5695 ikr!!!
Ya
Crispy Banana HE?!?!?!?!?!
The real question is: WHY TF DOES A HEALTHY GUY TAKE A NAP IN THE HOSPITAL
He’s suffering from plot convince syndrome
Mandatory check ups are a thing for specific jobs. Also some illnesses you only start to actually notice when it's too late. So even people who think they're perfectly fine get check ups because they might have a serious illness.
You know how long it takes for doctors to actually get to your room it takes them like a hour you could take a nap in that time
@@Silvianyay lol
He could be waiting for a family member or friend who is getting checked out..
If you just need a simple push, then he's not that fat
KILLED ME
love your profile picture lmao
@@barbara174 LMAOOOO i love yours
@@fridasophiaaaa pls i love finding stays in random videos lmaooo
@@barbara174 I knaurrr, it feels like we're a big fandom now lmao
@@fridasophiaaaa exactly LOLL
The real question how is the one without a heart alive
Maybe his heart is just almost "dead"
The true answer is that the one who needs the heart is dead, and you can transplant their organs
The one without the heart needs a transplant to get a different one, he still has a heart but he needs a better one to stay alive
Yeah and the one without a kidney can survive u only need one kidney to survive XD oof
@@PhoenixMilk you could have one kidney destroyed and one damaged enough to be failing, so he could have actually needed a kidney
"This is Canada.. WHERE ARE ALL THE OTHER DOCTORS?!"
I know!
In hawaii.
I was shook(y)
We laugh now but....
yeah here in canada we have tons of doctors!
So
The trolley cart situation at the start
I have an answer
*why the hell would there be workers on an active trolley cart rail*
Blueberry Cheesecake
I have an answer: I would not switch the track and would drive right over the five ppl, killing all 5 of them. Then I would stop the train after some distance and run back to the 5 guys. Hopefully the 1 guy from the other track would have come over to try and help the 5 ppl, and as I approach him, I look as if I’m scared and crying. Then when I’m close enough, I’ll stab and kill him. Then I’ll repetitively stab all 6 of them over and over as they cry out in pain begging me for mercy. Then I’ll finish all of them off, so they can’t come for revenge. This is assuming I could get away with everything.
@@samgoode2274 edgy but I totally agree with you
@@samgoode2274 Do you need help??
@@superiorbeing8805
It was a joke
Cøffee Cup u dumped morals down the drain
Imagine killing the check-up guy and none of his organs are a match
Dang...
oof
That would be a waste of time then
I see 6 body lifeless here
Well, you improved your kill to death ratio
I was laughing so hard at 4:21 "You can get away with everything." and the responce was "Well, I wouldnt stop with just one murder.. I would keep going.." That had me rolling in hysterics...
He instantly became my fave guy 😂 he’s so real 🤣
I love this contrast of funny chatting and serious and intelligent brainstorming in your videos. Paired with the cartoon style it makes them so entertaining!
I couldn't agree more. I'm now addicted to it. I might need help.
Andion I subbed can you sub back
Yeah totally.... Definitely being selfless
4:23 "Lawsuit"! The only thing between Stephen and mass murder XD
Haha so true!!!
Stephen: 1 persons life is less valuable then 5 persons lives
Also stephen: how dare you value that 5 lives over 1 life
We don't knowmwjerher the healthy guy's organs will be accepted by the people, needing a donor. To kill one person andmchqnce six deaths seems too risky. Kill one of the people needing an organ donor and give their organs to the other four people would be the most ethical and viable decision. The healthiest person or the sickest person in the group is now the big dilemma?
True
For the train one/ride I'd flip the the thing on the side and hit all 6 at the same time... I'm just kidding, dont kill me FBI
spelling please
ikr
So, in my psychology class, we’re learning about how humans develop ethics and morals. Let me just say I quite literally jumped out of my seat when I saw we were watching a DanPlan video as one of the videos for class.
luckyy
How
@@Siidan-ii wdym how
(ㅇㅁㅇ!)
@@KingSaysHellohow do humans do that?
The correct answer is tokyo drift the trolly to kill all 6
Andrew Clements this man gets it
Just move the one guy over
Andrew Clements go for that Sextupile kill streak
Deja Vu!
Andrew Clements
Or you could yell at them to get out of the way if you have time.
Wait, if I have time to turn, don't the workers have time to move?
no.no they wont
They must be stupid to not hear a loud freaking train running their way.
But.....they dont know where its gonna go
@Klint AC I don't care, if a trolley is coming my way, I'm getting off the track regardless of whether or not it turns
No, because in the original situation, the workers are all wearing earmuffs and can't hear the trolley coming.
1:12 if it is KKK, I would keep going STRAIGHT
6
3
6
could i go straighter?
What kind of KKK is it the Philippine KKK that is for making people have hope or the other one?
@@linachorus2001 probably the other one
@@linachorus2001 yea I think so
I think that the biggest difference in the situations is that there is always an objectively better choice to save the 5 people over the 1, but in the doctor and fat guy situations, you would be making someone else's decision. If it is set in stone that you must make the decision, you can relatively guiltlessly sacrifice the one, but if the one still has agency, it feels wrong to choose for them.
How can ethics be objective?
Objective on which basis?
Also, when you turn to kill the one person and save the other 5 you're doing the same thing as when you would push the fat guy or harvesting the organs, how can you not see it?
what's different? Only because there is a machine between you and the victim? The point is that you're the one controlling the machine.
There's the logical answer I was looking for. The difference on a lot of these is the agency of the decision. If either of your choices means someone dies but only you can make that decision, it's easy to sacrifice the one for the many. However, if you choose to make someone make the sacrifice when they should have the option to make it themselves, it's no longer an unavoidable action on your part. They had the agency to make their own decision. The fat guy could choose to sacrifice himself to stop the trolley. The healthy patient could be informed and choose to give up their organs. You don't have the right to make that choice for them. With the trolley though and you having to choose to switch the rails, only you can make the choice and someone dies either way, so the correct decision morally would be the one for the many, because you had the agency to make a move and save more lives.
But aren’t you just doing the same thing aren’t you taking the agency from the one person and basically forcing them to sacrifice themselves for the 5 people
@@bahnankhayre9534 That's something of a fair argument, but they are not even in the position to make the choice at that moment. It's really more of an explanation of the situation and why one is more easily seen as morally bad and the other is not seen that way so easily to most people.
Moral of the story: don't be fat because everyone will want to sacrifice you
Well I'm gonna die.
Edit: I left for three months, what the heck?
same
I would kill the five people people on the track. They can learn not to be on a train track, in heaven.
@@acutedog162 yo thats what i was kinda thinking like why are you on the tracks why don't you see a trolley is about to hit you. Like don't be stupid and you'll stay safe... but whatever
Me that actually is but doesn't eat a lot now for so reason and only ate a little bit of food today: *So anyway-*
Dan- lets say you can get away with everything.
Stephen- Well then i wouldn't stop with that murder.
Stephen is a closet pyscho
The_ Knife_Pie "new video - are you a psychopath?"
He is just socially conscious; if you can get away with anything... you would find a sick fantasy to live out as well. its the beast nature; if there is no consequence to you then there is no need for moral action.
fallout for instance
You can kill everyone and steal everything its just a game there's no real consequences. To not do a single bad thing in that game is a lot harder then being as evil as can be.
The_ Knife_Pie yeah me too XD
The_ Knife_Pie Gadget
The_ Knife_Pie he is in all of them lol
Next question: 6 patients come in your way that we’re hit by a trolley
Hmm what a coincidence
Ikr
0.0bWow I never thought of that XD
I guess that fat guy didn't stop the trolley...
@@PxndaCakes That was my reaction. Especially with the one being critically injured. Guess he didn't stop the trolley AND he didn't die AND the 5 guys didn't die so...the previous situation worked out way better than I could have hoped...granted they only _technically_ "survived" only to be left in a state where they still might die but hey, guess we are getting asked these questions by the devil, hear that guy loves technicalities.
I immediately thought of it, I laughed so hard xDD
Armin Arlert once said:
“I don't like the terms "good person" or "bad person" because it is impossible to be entirely good to everyone. To some, you are a good person, while to others, you are a bad person.”
So therefore, we are all neither good nor bad people.
You’re not as bad as your worst decisions.
its all abt perspective. There is no true good or evil, its just the way you see things vs others see things. At least thats what I think
@@citriccat142 everyone has a different moral compass 👍
thats a stupid thing to say. just because some people view you as bad or good doesn't mean you are bad or good because of their perspective of you. you are bad or good based on your actions
“This is Canada..! wHerE aRe thE othErs dOctOrS!?”
*lmao* 😂
Lol
not in america that’s for damn sure😂
lol tru for real lmao
In America WHERE ARE THE OTHER 99999999 PATIENTS
Yeah where are they >:(
You really see how his friends try to avoid these difficult questions by humor
A teacher once asked us the first question the other way around.
So you're driving towards the one person but plot twist: the one person is someone you know and like.
That's a good twist. It makes you think even more about your values.
Have her die and retrieve the body
AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHSHSHSHAHSHAHA #Necrophilia
My teacher said that the girl was your child lol
I'm going with 5 people then. Call me selfish but every human has to be selfish at some point
I save the one i love rather than 5 guys i don't know.
“Are you a good person?”
- No.
Edit: uh..the f#ck?..likes? What?
°-°
YES! FINALLY
:’)
Im a good person
Or im i 😈😈😈😈😈
No I am not sorry but I already started killing 🤔😄
I’m more like a wolf in sheep’s clothing lol
"No matter how good of a person you are, you are the villain in atleast someones life. So get yourself together and atleast be a good villain"
Casually taking a dude organs during a check-up
@Braedon Collins shut up
Monica Granger it’s just a simple correction
Well he was asleep so idk he may wake up
oops
I know right
"either turn right and kill 1 or stay straight and kill 5"
Animator draws the turn as left
0:50
Housa why 😂😂😂
@@stock7416 ITS HOSUH.
Kill 5 because the 1 person is working alone and if i will the first one of the 5 then the others will run
@Pure_Steve _1153 let the other four die because they weren't helping the human on the right! (๑و•̀ω•́)
@が 大好きビクトリア 和 アニメ *kill them all*
"Let's be serious, here."
_Organ Bucket_
I can't like I have to keep the 666 likes
0:03 that sounds like the beginning of the supernatural outro
there is a reason why the answer changes. when you are contemplating taking a turn choosing to kill one person or going straight and killing 5, your choices are exactly that being personally responsible for 1 death or for 5. On the other hand, when you are pushing the fat guy onto the track you are choosing between being responsible for one death or zero. Yes, 5 people are going to die if you don't push the guy but those 5 deaths are not your responsibility and no one is gonna question you why you didn't push the guy to save the 5. At the end of the day, it is not an ethical dilemma, it is simply a question of what are you willing to be responsible for? There is also the fact that working on the tracks the 5 workmen have consented to the inherent risks associated with the work and the one being push did no such thing.
@David Winehouse you're not responsible, because if you were to not change the tracks then you wouldn't have proactively done an action that killed someone but if you do change the tracks then you are proactively doing something that will kill someone. So, in my opinion it boils down to whether or not you believe that the ends justify the means, because if you do, then killing is is favored when it will save more lives, but if you don't, then killing is wrong regardless of how many lives it will save
Just scream to those 5 people to move.
Also with the organ transplant one, the options change. In the first question if you do nothing all 6 die so you have to choose the lesser of two evils, but in the second one if you do nothing only 5 will die and if you save them one will die. This makes it harder to answer because in both cases you have be directly responsible for murder.
@@pooltable1339 In the first question if you do nothing not all 6 people die? Only the five that were on the tracks which the trolly was going towards.
The difference between the first and second problem : 1 situation you act on the cart, 1 situation you act on the person.
Why is there a guy for a checkup in an organ donors office?
Thay said hes in the next room
@@shl3bl3_25 That would be in the organ donor wings than. He still shouldn't be there
Where were all the other doctors tho? Thats what I‘m thinking...
Maybe he had a surgery with this and he came up for a checkup so they could see if everything is right after the surgery
"Are you a good person?"
me: "I eat cereal with a fork"
everyone: "Are you Satan?"
Flysmite how the fuck do you eat cereal with a fork
That comment is emotional abuse.
I eat cereal with bare hands
Flysmite same then I drink the milk with a spoon
I eat cereal with a fork as well, dry cereal with a glass of milk.
I had a class in university in Japan during study abroad, and it was literally reading and talking over these exact situations, and talking through it in groups and in front of the class, then the professor would discuss the author's philosophy and the 'answers' to these questions.
Brought back memories. Thanks for the vid.
Funny enough this video actually came out before I even went to the class, so in an alternate reality I could have seen this first, and went into the class already enlightened.
*"Well then I wouldnt stop at this murder I'd keep going"*
I know it might sound weird but if you do something this crazy (murder) then why don’t you just kill some more? You’re going to jail and ruining your life anyway so why not?
i laughed so hard at that
@@limonkowyludz1328 because if you do you'll most likely have a longer sentence in jail.
"Then I wouldn't stop there and kill more."
*shows Yuno pictures*
I find it funny that he says murder rather than something else
this is the same way the terrorist think of us when we go to their country and kill their love ones.
Me too..bcoz its hypothetical questions.
Lovey Dub 😂😂 I burst out laughing when I heard that
as the king of Wakanda put it
"victory at the expense of the innocent is no victory at all"
Every war ever...
The needs of the many...
In that situation I think if I was the bystander, I would honestly just try to scream at everyone to get out of the way. Like. That's all I can do. And panic and cry afterwards
Stephen: I’m a philosophical thinker
Hosuh: who are you and what did you do to Stephen
“A-Ah!”
Daniel - 2017
“Speaking of cannibalism!”
Hosuh - 2017
“Lawsuits coming your way!”
Stephen - 2017
😂😂😂
:|
FUN EXTENSION! :
what if the 1 person on the train tracks was a loved one, would you still save the 5 ?
REEEEEEE NOW IT'S HARDER
Fire Godess 👉😎👉
I'd still run over the 5 either way, honestly.
That was also in the book
Its easy their strangers they probably won't save me so why save them so I would save the loved one (if I had one)
i think the difference between the questions is that, in one of them u have 6 persons involved in the situation, in the other one, theres the five involved and 1 that isnt, so in a way, its worst adding the non-involved person, versus the one where he is already in it
1. Kill 1
2. Scream “run”
3. Save the 5
4. Do nothing
I’m fringing insane
4
4...
I think the same thing
BÉANIE .s 1
5. Profit
Him: Life is never black and white
Me: Exactly it's rainbow..
UNLIKE THE BLOOD IN THIS VIDEO
ooooh gottem
The Blood In this Video Brightens my Mind.
2:30 No, I don't believe it does.
Just because you didn't act in the best interests of the five workers by sacrificing the fat guy, it doesn't make you a morally nasty person, it makes you rather normal. What kind of person is willing to throw just about anyone ONTO the tracks to save a group of people. By doing so you are taking his life. It is classified as murder, or maybe even vehicular manslaughter. It has a designation.
However, if you DON'T act, you are still morally justified. What kind of person can stop a trolley car or a train? Probably superman, but we are just mere people. In fact, I think that in a real scenario one would be too shocked by the visuals to even consider murdering the person beside him. Anyways, you cannot otherwise stop the train unless you commit murder. Even if you did consider it an option, you are perfectly justified if you don't act.
"The bigger question is how to kill all 6 of them" The Good Place: Micheal (A demon)
AYYY THE GOOD PLACE! GOAT
Finally, I was waiting for this one😂😂😂💀💀💀
all 7 of them actually if you count yourself
Explain the reference, source ???
@@isaultra3405 tv show called the good place
I know I'm late to comment, but on the organ one, I'd probably not take the organs, partially because we don't know if blood types will match. I mean, if the one healthy guy has the most incompatible blood type, then he can't save all of the others anyway.
Dan: He teaches that life is never black or white.
Me: Then it’s gray..
Ami Cho gay or gray?
Ami Cho that’s racist
Wth you guys it's just a joke XD
nigga
Fifty shades of it to be exact
I'm shocked by how smart you guys are. Really! Deep thoughts... I really loved it. Brilliant minds!
For the Frist one,
*JUST WARN THE WORKERS*
Cant your going very fast in highly protected trolly. You think your gonna pop your head out and yell about a Trolly that the people can CLEARLY see....
@@aceofparts938 true
@@aceofparts938 but it didn't really say it was protected
It's a trolly.
@@aceofparts938 ok, you have a point
"who are you and what did you do to Stephen." That's exactly what I was thinking
Also if one is missing a heart he's already dead so take the organs from him
Vincent Liu he isn't missing a heart, his heart just isn't working right. it still is keeping him alive but its not gonna be working for long.
exactly
Dude have you watched docter shows, his heart is severlu damaged not dead to point where its not beating damage
The heart isn't what determines if you are dead or not. That's the brain. You are only dead after all brain activity stops.
yes but if your heart stops there is a pretty good chance you're fucked.
This is probably really weird but my answer to the question at 3:50, assuming that the patients organs are healthy except for 1, is: I would take the patient with the highest chance of death and take their organs and save the other patients. Cuz that person was already dying and they would technically be saving 4 others. Plus if they were dying the family would probably be prepared for the worst case scenario.
Caitlyn Alba OMG WOW thats really smart
Thats a good point
Their organs are fucked though
Smart
That probably wouldn't work though. The one with the highest probability of death that is in need of an organ transplant would be suffering from complete organ failure spurred by his or her other organ failing. In my mind, I assume the one in need of the organ the most, the pancreas patient, isn't as easily sustained on medical support like the others. That's why pancreatic cancer is so deadily, because it spreads easily but so many other bodily systems rely on the pancreas. Tbh, I would *ask* The pancreatic patient if he or she was willing to kick the bucket because of how difficult it is for he or she to survive because of it before any of the other organs suffered. But that's just my own assumptions, I'm not a medical professional.
Your hands are still tied no matter what, you cannot commit murder no matter how good your intentions are in order to save another life. Assisted suicide is another thing, but straight out murder of a patient who did not consent to their demise is illegal. The family can file for malpractice and wrongful death which will result in your license being revoked and possibly wind you up in jail.
1:27
If he's fat enough to stop a train I doubt he'll be living long anyways.
PS: I doubt he would be able to be pushed over either
PPS: How is the floor not broken?
yeah, and also, why was he just watching people die? he's most likely a psychopath and would probably kill people, therefore, push him, stop the trolley, also end his suffering.
@SCP 682
well obviously he's not trying very hard because they should be able to hear him
@@alastorbutwithagun well going by that logic, why wouldn't you shout to the workers instead of immediately thinking of killing another person for the sake of many? Why should one unhealthy man be disregarded so much that his only use is to be a sacrifice for others?
I’m confused ._.
I think you could turn horizontal and hit everyone with the train carts
to tip a trolley you put the thing to change lanes in the middle...itll derail and youll buckle on the side fast.... for your question
i would’ve gladly thrown myself on track-
Can Your Body *Stop The TRAIN* , tho 😅?
(Your Sacrifice Means Nothing, If The Train Didn't Stop And Killed The 5 Workers Anyway)
@@imashadow699 lol I'm useless even if i offer my whole life
@@user-ko3by9sp1r Exactly 🤣
(No, I'm Serious... You Can Do Much Effort If You Stay Alive, Like Blocking The Way With Something Rock Solid UNLIKE HUMAN'S BODY ,, even Throwing Bunch Of Any Kind Of Metals Will Probably Make Little Difference Rather Than "Just A Bunch Of Meat" 😅)
Stop bringing triggering topics on TH-cam.
I don't wanna ruin the 69 likes ↁ_ↁ
For the last case, you can sacrifice one person who need the organ transplant, and give his organs to the other 4 patients, which you will not need to kill that healthy guy.
Or... I'll Just Tell All Of Them To Seek Their Own Organs... My Job Is Transplant, not "Organs Seeker" 😅
You most likely couldn't, though. The odds of any 4 random people being a perfect match for the organs of any one other person are astronomically low.
Organs need matches or else they'll be rejected; the closer the match, the better. You can't just throw any random organ into any random person.
that is genius
The dilemma arises again though, why do you have the right to choose which of the 5 lives and who dies?
@@Ebamber3 well 4 lives is much more valuable then 1, of course if that 1 guy is a person who is working to beat cancer then ihis life is more valuable based on all the lives he could save in the future
1:30
This one is easy just scream really loud to the workers, trolleys aren’t that fast
"Who Are You, And What Have You Done With Stephen"
Can you do a 'what if i was a superhero' theme, like you pick your powers first n thn the contestants will be given various situtaions they have to resolve using those as well as some morally challenging situations about whether to kill a villain to save the future, might be fun
Yesss would be cool to hear how they do that!
burning blaze I subbed can you sub back
In the er, sure they focus on the people who are more injured, but they have to care for the people more likely so survive.
I'm not a good person ( 4:27 ) I agree with Stephen on most things, such as this
Same here
I almost always agree with Stephen
0-0
Same
I swear as soon as it was "you can get away with anything" my brain went like: "oh so let me do this and save 5 over 1."
Your content is so lighthearted and funny, yet gets serious and takes up some really morbid stuff. Smash that together with a great and personal cartoon style and boom, great content!!! Please keep this up guys so I ACTUALLY have something good in my feed for once :3
One year on American Idol, the contestants were divided into two groups and sent to the left and right. Contestant David Archuleta was then asked to pick whichever group he thought was more talented and then join that group. Rather than be pressured into such an impossible decision of choosing between friends, he sat right down in the middle of the stage and wouldn't participate. That may be a situation with entirely different stakes, but I believe the principle is the same.
We are not qualified to assign value to one person's life versus another's. I believe the only correct answer is not to act, because contrary to the modern self-reliant mindset, sometimes things are simply outside our control and responsibility.
Me:*sees title*
Also me: No but i'm-
*_the bad guy_*
*_duh_*
LOL good one
DADADADADADADADADADADDAADDADADDADGGDGHDDDJFHFJFJD)CHFHFJFJDJJCJKFJRKDIFJFKDKKCCJCKD IM
@@weirdo1766 😆
Whyyyyyy
@@weirdo1766 r/ihadastoke
Stephans answer at 0:23 is so facts I try to answer it that way every time.
Steven's my favorite character out of these but tbh.. I would never go to the hospital with Steven.. or lean over a train track near him.......................................................... Or anything that could result in my death. Ok, bye.
The reason I think in the second and fourth scenarios people have more doubt in killing the one guy is because they are directly causing their deaths, in the first and third scenarios someone's going to die either way so you may as well pick the one that causes the least deaths but in the other scenarios the five people are going to die and you are directly choosing to save them by involving someone who wasn't going to die.
The reason I would hit the single worker or tend to the 5 patients but not push the fat dude or harvest the unsuspecting patient is largely due to the idea of voluntary sacrifice and the application of morality to circumstantial threats.
I think the voluntary element is important because circumstantial danger isn't a moral dilemma. Someone being in the path of a circumstantial threat (such as a vehicle that won't brake, a natural disaster, a disease, etc) is simply a part of existing. Now, someone can choose to sacrifice themself to mitigate causalities, but I don't believe it is innately any sort of responsibility since they didn't create the circumstance.
You could argue that altruism is the highest form of morality, but frankly, if everyone were martyrs there'd be no one to remember them.
In both the 1 vs 5 workers on the track and the 1 vs patients in the OR, the role of making a sacrifice falls on you as an inevitability since none of the workers/patients can choose to make this sacrifice themself nor inform you on what they would want. You choose the lesser amount of causalities since you are the only one who can make the choice.
In the fat dude/unsuspecting patient cases, the two are aware and capable of making (or objecting to) their sacrifice. You could choose to inform them of their ability to be altruistic. This gives them the choice to be altruistic and do what they will with their life, whereas the other subjects were wholly incapable of making this choice in their scenarios.
Essentially, I think it's more wrong to take the life of someone who you're capable of giving the choice to live or die, but not so wrong to take the life of someone who is incapable of choosing for themself, leaving you only with the ability to decide based on objective numbers.
Yeah, that makes sense. Oh, also: The trolley people know the dangers of their work, and accepted them. The fat guy and the healthy patient did not agree to the dangers, so therefore you can't just force them to do as such for others.
But the knowledge of the outcome is also a big part of these problems. For instance, could you divert the trolley if you didn't know for sure who would die and who would live given your decision? If 5 moderately injured people and one man in critical condition arrived is still it more just or moral to start with the 5 who were less injured?
This would make for an excellent report/essay on opinionated morality.
Opinions don't mean shit, life doesn't care about your feelings. Facts are facts.
@@sharifbrown3567 That's your opinion, and I don't care about it.
I really expected Stephen to say that he’d keep the trolly going to kill as many people as possible
0:38 if you flip it all of the people on will die
- [RANT: don't read if you don't want to] -
Some of these moral dilemmas don't make sense. For instance, if I can see people about to be hit by a train, I can also warn them and they should hear me or the train as sound travels farther than the eyes can see. Plus, even if a healthy patient was available to have their organs transplanted, the possibility of their genetics matching all five patients is nigh impossible.... like, what? Not to mention the reason people ask questions like: "what if those five were murderers and the one was a doctor" is because we have a sense of right and wrong and we value those we deem innocent based on those presuppositions.
I honestly don't think things are as morally grey as people suggest, most times people just tend to take a mathematical perspective and assume more lives equates to a better result.
The real question moral 'dilemmas' ask is how willing are you to take on guilt and to commit crimes
ok yeah but calm down
@@charificusii8618 I wrote that 7 months ago. I just wanted to comment on the video because I liked the channel so much. I was calm.
Can't we just back off the car?
My like was the 70th.
no i agree with you.
I think you should just yell at the workers , OUUTTA DEH WAI
0:53 id aim for that center between both options derailing the trolley crashing into a building
1. Don't push fat guy. The workers should have known the dangers of their work place. They weren't paying attention and some guy on the side shouldn't be sacrifices for the irresponsibility of 5 others.
2. Without consent, taking another person's organs from someone completely healthy isn't right. It sucks, but at the very least, the patients needing a transplant were already thinking that they wouldn't make it. These surgeries are a big deal. What would the family of a completely healthy dude think if he just randomly died out of the blue with 5 organs missing? It would hit much harder than someone who was unlucky enough to have a bad organ.
Canextro
Good point
Canextro all you have to do is yell for the one person to move and motion the trolley driver to go to the other side
1. yells at the single person to get out of the way
You guys should check out Mayer-Briggs personallity test. It's pretty fun and could maybe fit into a future video. I don't find these tests too precise but it's the most legit you could find. Peace.
The Myers-Briggs test is a joke. And several "variations" of it do not even offer spectrum-based answers, just the extremes. Meaning that they are all worse.
I agree, they give very vague answers. Surprisingly people still use it on job interviews.
16personalitys is the most consistent in my opinion
Bokan96 The MBTI _test_ is invalid and wannabe psychological stuff that tries to put people into categories. To use MBTI properly you need to study cognitive functions
Actually, it's not. The most accurate you can find is the big five.
Military triage: the most severe injuries are treated LAST.
Gosh you people should make a podcast
Pixesky-tale This is basically an animated podcast
By the way are you a good person?
Everyone: *With what right YOU say it!*
Jorge Daniel Diaz Santos do you mean “What gives YOU the right to ask that?!??”
@@Scarkesley That sounds a LOT better.
STROHEIM!!!
@@idiotsandwich115 YES! I AM!
And who tf are YOU to say that shit metal can.
There is actually sort of a term for what happened in the first dilemma. The bystander effect, there was this big study into it after an incident in New York, where many people in an apartment block witnessed a woman get murdered. The killer left for a while before returning to finish the job. No one did anything to stop it because of the bystander effect. Because there were other people, there was an assumption that someone else was doing something about it. So no one intervened.
i choose the 5 people because they can absorb the force of momentum of the trolley car, preventing the 1 person of permanent injury.
EDIT: didn't watch the whole video.
WatchTheWorldBurn Pepe I would choose the one, because I can actually attempt to pull a stunt to get him out of the way, and doing that gets more complicated the more people there are.
WatchTheWorldBurn Pepe I subbed to you can you sub back
Due to overpopulation, I’d ram those 5 fuckers more than 1
This is why everyone hates moral philosophy professors
(Please tell me someone gets this)
I get it.
I live it
Welcome back to the *good place*
I have a stomachache
B R U H
why can't they just get out of the track what are they glued to it?
It's a thought experiment designed to have only two choices. Forsake something to save something else, the scenario is not meant to be realistic, it is mean to make you choose between 5 lives or 1.
*meant
Sam Goode It’s still a pretty shit thought experiment, considering you can poke so many holes in it.
Plot twist: They were not actually workers, they were screaming women tied to the tracks.
i feel like so many answers will change once the people involved are people we love like our family and friends.
The trolly problem was in The Good Place and that's all I can imagine now :P
LOL SAME
So was the doctor one too! And same lmao
*Omg I thought I was the only one lol*
Me TOO!
Yes i yas like CHIDI???
the difference between the first and second is that in the first you have to kill one, you have no choice. kill one or kill five is your only option. in the second one its not your problem, you don't have to kill anyone at all so you can just be a bistander. i don't think its the people that you think about whebn answering ths question, its what's best for you.
Huh, that's definitely something to consider
I wouldn't deliberately change rails, if it would kill someone else. I don't value the 5 people over the 1, or the 1 over the 5. Swapping lanes would make me a murderer, where staying the course would make me a bystander.
Jeppe Beier how Would letting you get 5 people killed make you a bystander but changing the rails to save those 5 but kill 1 make you a murderer
Milan Vissers because it wasn't my fault they were there, and the one person's life isn't worth less than the five
Jeppe Beier even if you think that the 5 are worth just as much as 1 it also isnt your fault that he is there so switching either wont make you a murderer or your a murderer no matter what
The Trolley Problem is only difficult because of the way it's asked. It presents you with a situation, and then gives you an either or. If someone says something like “I would throw myself in front of the trolley”, the common response is “well, what if you couldn't”. This sort of manipulation makes it so they have to decide between only the two answers you give. To answer it morally for every question, don't do anything, except in the doctor scenario where you are obligated to heal the 5 people and not the one. The Trolley Problem isn't actually about being good or bad, but instead about if morality is set or malleable. A moral stance would say that the action of taking control is also assigning your own worth to the people, while not doing anything allows their fates to remain in their own control. A malleable moral stance would say that morals change based on the outcome. One life is less than five, and 5 people are better than one, thus kill the one. To accept morals is to only use what you own to change this. You don't own the life of the fat man or the people on the tracks, only your own life, which is why you jumping is more moral. Doing nothing is also more moral than pushing the fat man, because by pushing the fat man, you are claiming ownership over his life and his fate. Hose's stance is clearly explained when he says he doesn't think good or bad exists. I would have to fundamentally disagree with him, because of his reasoning. Just because certain civilizations at one point thought something was good, doesn't change its moral value. Morals are not decided by the masses over time, but operate on the same level as the statement “stones are hard”. If morality exists, then different views on morals don't prove morals wrong, it just means that those civilizations, at that time, were wrong. If people think something is wrong when it's actually right, it makes the people wrong, not the morals. If stones are hard, but everyone says they are soft, who is wrong? Obviously the people.
"Than I wouldn't stop at this merder I would keep going!"
"Up top!" Me.
*Murder
its quite simple the change between first and second question in the first one you are directly involved and will guarentee a loss but in the second you could just ignore it and it wouldnt affect you in also people must remember in situations humans have been shown to quite frankly ignore much worse crimes i can completely absolve myself of any part in the 2nd question
Why are there that many people by the tracks in the first place?
are you dumb? they obviously looking for the TMNT
My answer was to rapidly switch the lever to possibly derail it. The main reason why I would rapidly switch it is so that I didn't actively choose someone.
1. dont steer the trolley to the left(active murder)
2. dont push the guy over(active murder)
3. flip a coin to determine who to save(human life cant be weighed)
4. no, wtf(active murder)
I'm just sticking to my own morals, not trying to kill as many as possible
1. steer the trolley left for the greater good and since i think that just standing and doing nothing makes you a killer
2. push the guy because of the same reasons
3. save the five because I'm obliged to save as many lives i can
4. use one of the five to save the rest of the four. or tell the healthy guy and give him the option. the reason im not killing him is because when he went to the hospital he wasn't subjecting himself to any kind of danger and if i kill him i directly make the whole idea of going to a hospital dangerous, the trolly group did something that would have subjected them to danger no matter what and the fat guy was also subjecting himself to danger of falling.
i think i have different morals because in my society it's less about "me" and more about "us"
Not choosing is a choice in itself
the withering production your philosophy hints more towards totalitarianism my boi
rodrigo herrera That's utilitarianism, the idea of maximizing the greater good(even if it means having to do "evil" things). Totalitarianism means a government that controls its citizens' entire lives, and doesn't have anything directly to do with any of these philosophies.
Cedie Austria Kansei Doriftu!
I am a good person. I would check the breaks before driving fast :)
You indeed are a good person
I guess I'm not XD
(I choose the 5 bc more ppl die)
@@happipog weird flex but ok
omg 1:42 savage... lol man these questions made me think... and in the end couldn't answer any.. :(
:( they're designed to make your brain hurts. Feels terrible
you succeeded! LOL :)
the answers of mine for the questions:
1st: Don't do anything, since it's not my job to push someone and kill it to save 2 guys WHO AREN'T PAYING ATTENTION!(so basically it's their fault) and if we consider that, the guy can live his life well, why end it? it's like, how would you feel, if you were just watching a beautiful thing, then... someone runs towards you pushes you into a train and you die! do you think that would be a good choice? No, just let that nature do it's own things, no matter what. If those guys weren't paying attention, THEY WEREN'T PAYING ATTENTION.
2nd: I would probably tell the people, that a few of them must die, in order to save the others, else they all will die. from now on it's their own decisions. And if they say that they don't want to donate their organisms to others, because they would die, i would just tell them: "You will die one way, or another, but a few of you has 100% of death" AND i would probably ask them, to make a paper about "If i die, i will donate my [organism] to the others" soo that way, it will be just the luck which determines who dies first who dies second and soo on.(probably the Lung and Heart will die, so i would consider telling them, to please be kind, and save the others)
They would probably know the chances, and by that logic, they will surely think of who to save first or sacrifice first, and if i were in their place, i would sacrifice the one with the heart problem first(even if i had the heart problem) OR try to determine the age differences, and for example if someone is old that much, he might think of sacrificing himself/herself for the better, and if all of them are young the heart and the lung has the highest chance OR if 2 people needs the same thing, then 2 people must be sacrificed anyway.
DanPlan hurt*
Kuukid, for all of them, I chose the singular person, not multiple, but it still made me feel uneasy about it.
For the trolly cart question I would go for the 5 and then go back and get the 1
Isn't easier to scream to the workers, like "LOOK OUT! THERE'S A FUCKING TRAIN GOING ON YOUR DIRECTION!"
Lol
Probably not because if they can't hear the train (or even feel the shaking but let's ignore that) they might be deaf.
So they notice that their about to die an agonizing death before you run em over with the train
“It’s easy, there’s no dilemma here, I just stick a sharp spear out the window to kill the 1 worker while killing the original 5 workers.”
- a wise man
Kkkkkkk *wise demon
:)
Trolley problem solved: Horn. People will hear it and move, if they don't hear it because headphones, oh well.
So the question about the 5 mildly injured and the 1 severely injured question, I would choose the 1 severely injured person because I chose not to hit the 5 people on the train track, so they wouldn't be hurt. Boom. Best answer (I guess).
Doge The Swaggy Then you are contradicting yourself. First you let one die to save five, and now you've let five die to save one.
I feel like the guy was making a joke.
actually the event with the doctor you have no choice since the rule (in my country) is to heal the most heavily injured first, free of choice! yay
Doge The Swaggy I would let the five die because population contol
Doge The Swaggy severly injured i agree cuz if its minor they will prob have longer 2 live
3:12 standard procedure is to care for the moderately injured (saveable) first, severely injured second or never (just painkillers)