Trolley Problem Mysteries: May We Harm Some to Save Others? (Part 1)

Frances Kamm gives a talk called "Who Turned the Trolley? Is There a Problem?" which is the first in a series of lectures on the Trolley Problem called "The Trolley Problem Mysteries: May We Harm Some to Save Others?". This was part of the Tanner Lecture Series given at Berkeley in 2013 with commentary by Judith Jarvis Thomson.
Note, the introductions for both Frances Kamm and Judith Jarvis Thomson have been edited out. Frances Kamm is a distinguished philosopher whose work focuses on normative and applied ethics. More particularly, her research has taken up issues in nonconsequentialist ethical theory and the moral problems of mortality, bioethics, torture and war. Her writings deftly engage both the theoretical aspects of morality and their practical applications, probing the structure of the moral realm through rigorous reflection on ingenious hypothetical cases and thought experiments.
00:00 Frances Kamm's Lecture
1:02:52 Judith Jarvis Thomson
1:22:08 Q&A
#philosophy #ethics #moralphilosophy

[@Philosophy_Overdose]

This is a re-upload.

[@pluto9000]

Where is the original video?

[@Philosophy_Overdose]

@@pluto9000 It no longer exists...

[@ntang99]

What if one of the five persons could pull the switch?

[@mojdemarvast2366]

Thank you
to set the scale and weigh…

[@magouliana32]

The answer is simple to those who know .
No one has to be killed both choices are equally wrong and unacceptable.
The question is hypothetical and we reject the premise so neither has to die.
If faced with this situation in reality we will find a way to not kill anyone.
The trickery here is only giving two options.

[@TheMytenmetz]

You are missing the Point: You are not supposed to actually solve the Trolley Problem. rather it is a thought experiment that creates a framework in which you can argue for different normative and ethical positions. In real life, for instance in medicine, there are situations, such as triage, in which you have to weigh up human lifes and make principled decisions. in these situations, you cannot reject the premises.
And thats why the Trolley Problem is so central: you can think about these situations in a clear cut and straightfoward way. You can also modify the Trolley Situation to be according to your needs.

[@magouliana32]

@@TheMytenmetz you have to understand the overall context and reasons these thought experiments were created for.
They are designed to create a narrow way of thinking that can be used in order to achieve certain desired results in those being taught.
Phillippa Foot and Judith Jarvis were involved in making abortion more acceptable in the US and the trolley “problem” helps towards that goal.
If you research a bit you will find the overall scheme and the duration of will connect.
Philippa foot “The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect” is a good start for you.
This is sophistry being used for social engineering not philosophy.
It is never permissible to kill even in thought experiments, the premise must be rejected it is barbarian.
The only time it is truly just and moral is if the one to be killed is guilty of a killing or about to kill another innocent human being.

[@montusinghsodhi]

​@@TheMytenmetz Apt explanation 👏🏻