• Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Drag chooses to kill those people because drag knows nothing about them. Drag just assume they’re randos. And on average, people suck. Drag’s friends are great people.

    If drag knew more about the people, the equation would change. Drag finds it difficult to reason seriously about a scientist discovering a cure for cancer, since there’s no such thing. There are hundreds of cancers. There’s no one solution for all of them and there never will be. We’ll need hundreds of cures for cancer, many of which we already use today.

    If we went with a more realistic scenario, like “one of those people will be the leader of the USA’s communist revolution”, drag would be much more willing to kill drag’s friends. Drag might also commit suicide about it, though, so maybe the numbers aspect is equal anyway. Would drag give drag’s life and all drag’s friends’ lives away for a communist America? Probably, but drag would sure like some assurance it’s going to be proper anarchist communism, and drag wants to know if another leader could have taken that place. Does drag even believe in the “great man” approach to history, or is there no such thing as such a leader? Is there nobody that important?

    • drake@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s perfect, drag, I don’t think anyone could have put it better. The trolley problem is a philosophical thought experiment, yet so many people approach it like it’s some sort of engineering problem that has right and wrong answers, I think it’s probably a consequence of our sort of “tech bro” culture that everything needs to fit into this rational, quantitative framework - we have this drive to put numbers on things that just can’t be rationalised in that way.

      People are funny, complicated things, and I love them all!