1) a- Imagine you are the driver of a trolley car and it is speeding unable to stop at a very high-speed, at the end of the track you see 5 construction workers, working away on the track. You are about to stop but your breaks have ceased working…. you begin to panic knowing you will kill all 5 of these people when you notice to the right another path you could turn to, however the end of this path has 1 worker, working away. You can either choose to kill this one worker and save the lives of 5 of the other workers. What in this situation is the “right” thing to do
Morality is defined normally by the consequence of an action and these consequences are all that matter in the situation. The moral dilemma in this is that whichever way you decide to take the trolley towards, you end up killing people. The consequences of both actions are the same, one person on either side will die either way, what about those four people? Does that change a decision?
I think it is morally permissible to turn the trolley in this situation because staying on the straight path leads you to kill 4 more separate people, afterwards you will know that you saved more people than were killed, although not a completely justifiable answer a greater amount of people get to live which would make more sense to me. I do not believe that in this situation many people would truly turn the trolley because they would morally agree upon saving the greater amount of people.
I do think that it is morally permissible not to turn the trolley. The fact of the matter will stay the same that you have killed and in my moral opinion it is better in this situation to kill less than more. At the end of the day it is not in all entirety your fault, it just so happened that the breaks stopped working, which has led up to your decision in something quite troubling, however when you weigh out the situation the one person ends up in a loss because the 5 people all together out weigh him. b- In class we discussed how morality is not a forced part of nature but rather something perceived in one’s mind based upon their natural led lives to be correct. Therefore in that current moment you would not be led into thinking any argument’s for which would be more correct, you would think about how by killing the one person you are saving the other 5 and since in this situation death is unavoidable in both instances many people agreed in the class saying this would not be morally corrupt.
We also discussed the support of the position in not turning the train and no one specifically went towards that answer but instead went on to say that both situations are unjust and if
