Trolley problem and white lies

[Rau]

However, then we got confronted by trolley problem question. I googled around and found St. Thomas Aquinas double effect explanation. It was also quite clear.

Double effect does not make it ok to throw the lever in the classic trolley problem. A little Google can often lead to error!

 

[kapp19]

Double effect does not make it ok to throw the lever in the classic trolley problem.

Sly… I had to think about this for a moment… but you’re right. The content of the will also matters - what one actually wants from pulling the lever…

 

[Rau]

The bystander intends to minimize death. That’s fine. But the trolley / tracks is a very particular setup. The lever inherently does more than divert away. It inherently selects who shall be killed. Alas the bystander can’t choose to be a part of the evil even when his only wish is to minimize the death toll.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Self defense is not the trolly problem.

 

[kapp19]

Ohhh… No, I do not agree at all, unless the second party has a special relation to reason. The easy litmus test, which helps to demarcate the object in this case, is the criterion for success… If the group is avoided, the act was successful - regardless of whether the train hits anyone else. Sorry, that seems pretty clear to me, and I think the consensus of the authors is pretty much the same on that.

Quite different with the fat man in front of a crowd, towards whom one can redirect the train to prevent running into the crowd.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

We may not do evil so that good may come of it.

Have you ever sat death watch at a bedside? Let’s say a dad is dying and keeps asking for his estranged son who has been clear he will not visit.

We don’t have to say “Johnny hates you and is not coming” or lie and say “Johnny is stuck in traffic”

Those there can simply say “dad, let’s pray for Johnny right now. As far as I know, Johnny is not traveling this way, but prayer is the best thing we can do”

My dad is in a fragile state right now, both physically and mentally. My brother found out he has the early stages of prostate cancer, something dad went through some time ago. When I talk to my dad and he asks how my brother is doing, he’s not going to accept changing the subject so I either have to tell the truth or lie. The truth would put a level of worry on him that his body may not be able to take. In my opinion, and the opinions of my three siblings, lying about this matter is worth it for our dad’s well-being.

And in general dodging answers like “let’s pray for him” don’t work. The classic example is if it was morally right to lie to the Nazis about knowing where Jews were hiding. I’ve heard multiple times Fr. Mitch Pacwa say it’s wrong to lie, but you can say something like, “Why would I know where they’re hiding?”, grossly misjudging the persistence of one looking to kill another.

 

[Rau]

If the group is avoided, the act was successful

Were the avoidance the only object, all good. But alas it is not. As I say, the trolley/track setup is very special.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Dad, none of us know the course that brother’s illness will take. As with everything, we put it in God’s hands.

 

[kapp19]

Well, I just completely disagree, and again, I think I’ve got the good majority of approved authors on my side. Unless we are thinking of entirely different problems, then I think you’ve just got this one totally wrong. One neither chooses nor intends the train destroying anyone - one foresees it and accepts it as a bad thing that will happen as a result of preventing something worse from happening. It seems, in fact, to be a duty in some cases.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Dad, none of us know the course that brother’s illness will take. As with everything, we put it in God’s hands.

That’s great, except the news itself could very literally kill my dad. That is simply not an acceptable risk.

 

[kapp19]

I think you are underestimating the “broadness” of broad mental reservations. Saying, “He’s alright,” does not necessarily seem to be lying - saying, “He does not have any kind of cancer at all,” would be. I’m sorry to hear of your circumstances… it must be difficult indeed.

 

[Rau]

One neither chooses nor intends the train destroying anyone - one foresees it and accepts

It is inherent in throwing the lever. Utterly inherent by the nature of the problem. The bystander chooses to point the train exactly at a couple of innocent people.

Well, I just completely disagree

We would not be the first.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

For sake of argument, his scenario was that someone is on their deathbed and terrible news come, and person asks about them. I dug up Catechism teaching and it was quite easy to solve.

If we don’t want to say something we should be silent not lie.

 

[TheLittleLady]

How is my son Johnny?

I texted him last night. His work is crazy busy right now and the kids are ready to go back to school. Do you want to call him?

 

[Rau]

If we don’t want to say something we should be silent not lie.

Doing nothing is sometimes the best option.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

How is my son Johnny?

I texted him last night. His work is crazy busy right now and the kids are ready to go back to school. Do you want to call him?

So he calls my brother and asks “How are you?” Now what? You’ve just kicked the can down the road.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

So he calls my brother and asks “How are you?” Now what? You’ve just kicked the can down the road.

That’s still a solution. You don’t have to mention a disease in the first place anyways.

 

[kapp19]

I choose to point the train exactly at a couple of innocent people.

No, you allow it - it neither motivates the act nor is integral to its success - the fact that there are people there at all is in fact secondary to the act insofar as you know that there will be less of a death count if you point it AWAY from the first group, which is the sole motivation.

You choose to let it run over more innocent people. I hope that is clear - you really actually make the one choice in a way you don’t make the other, the other being “per accidens” and “praeter intentionem”… You have the ability to reduce the death count - you don’t have the ability to eliminate the death count as foreseeable…

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

That’s still a solution. You don’t have to mention a disease in the first place anyways.

That’s not a solution for the family as a whole, just for me to pass the buck. At that point either my brother has to lie or tell the truth.

 

[TheLittleLady]

So you have forbidden your dad to talk to your brother?? Your is free to answer in the way he wishes. He can say “work is crazy, the kids are anxious to get back to school, Sally sends her love. I’ve got some seasonal allergies”

I have many health problems. This does not mean I read my med chart to every relative who calls.