Member-only story
The Trolley Problem Revisited: Moral Dilemmas in Everyday Life
As the complexities of the moral decision making persist the trolly problem is becoming the cornerstone of ethical thought experiments.
The scenario is simple: A trolley is heading towards five people tied to a track. You stand by a lever that can divert the trolley onto another track, where a single person is tied.
Do you pull the lever, sacrificing one life to save five?
As hard of a question this may seem however one thing for sure; it is not a theoretical dilemma. This scenario does indeed mirror the real world scenario where we as individuals or as a society must make decisions that weigh the greater good against individual harm. For example, consider the allotment of limited medical resources during a pandemic. Health experts may face a situation where they must decide which patients receive life-saving treatment when resources are scarce. This decision is comparable to the trolley problem — prioritizing the survival of many at the potential cost of a few.
The trolley problem also echoes discussions about self-driving cars. Programmers are now tasked with encoding ethical decisions into algorithms that will determine how an autonomous vehicle should behave in an accident scenario.
Should the car be programmed to prioritize the safety of its passengers or pedestrians?
If faced with an unavoidable crash, should it swerve to hit fewer people, even if it means certain harm to another?
These real-world applications reveal the nuances that the original trolley problem oversimplifies. For one, the problem assumes all lives are equal in value, but in reality, decisions are often influenced by additional factors such as age, social roles, or perceived societal contribution. Additionally, the binary nature of the original dilemma doesn’t account for alternative solutions that might minimize harm without sacrificing anyone.
Moreover, the psychological burden of making such a decision is immense.
In the heat of the moment, how does one live with the choice made?
Unlike the clinical detachment of a thought experiment, real-world scenarios involve emotions, relationships, and long-term consequences that can haunt decision-makers.
In revisiting the trolley problem, we see that moral dilemmas are rarely clear-cut. Ethical decision-making in everyday life requires balancing complex, often conflicting values.
While the trolley problem serves as a useful starting point for discussion, real-life scenarios demand a deeper understanding of human morality — a blend of logic, empathy, and the often uncomfortable acceptance of imperfection.
References:
1. Philippa Foot, “The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect”, Oxford Review, 1967.
2. Thomson, Judith Jarvis, “The Trolley Problem”, The Yale Law Journal, 1985.
