R
Rau
Guest
You would be a hero Tom!
- Status
S
St_Francis
Guest
Consider the tower at Shiloh… With your reasoning, anyone who suffers simply lacks sufficient faith. That is not what the Church teaches.
C
Crusaderbear
Guest
Sounds like somebody needs an answer to their philosophy 101 final… 
Filp to the one side quickly, problem over, now proceed to shout at that person to get off the tracks! Or set the switch half way and let God choose…
Filp to the one side quickly, problem over, now proceed to shout at that person to get off the tracks! Or set the switch half way and let God choose…
S
saellis
Guest
Sadly, it’s the 21st century and most people would just record the whole thing on their iphone rather than think of the morality of the two choices. 
M
mVitus
Guest
Tombdstone, while I admire the aspirations of your posts, I do believe it’s an impractical answer. If you truly have faith that strong, I appluad you, but most people don’t. I know i haven’t moved any mountains recently. In fact i realize my faith to be weak. I’d say most people are in the same boat and so while someone of incredible faith may have their best answer in jumping on a speeding train, finding the brake, learning how to engineer it, and fixing it all before four people died, most people would be obligated to switch the lever because their faith isn’t strong enough to do that. So I don’t think your answer wrong because it’d be the best case scenario, but I do feel it’s impractical for most. (But we’ll see if we’re ever in that situation.)
E
e_c
Guest
It seems he’s being facetious.
This is not what the expression of Our Lord means anyway…
D
dshix
Guest
It seems that the majority of the posters here don’t want to face the hypothetical proposed, and want to find some solution outside the parameters of the given hypothetical.
As the OP made clear, there is NO alternative choice. He said: “There is also no way to get all five men out of the situation alive; somebody is going to be dead no matter what you choose.”
It would be helpful if everyone posting would keep that in mind and actually try to answer the hypothetical directly.
As the OP made clear, there is NO alternative choice. He said: “There is also no way to get all five men out of the situation alive; somebody is going to be dead no matter what you choose.”
It would be helpful if everyone posting would keep that in mind and actually try to answer the hypothetical directly.
O
o_mlly
Guest
Proposing the dilemma as doing the lesser evil does not, I think, properly reflect the intention of the act. The choice is to do good – save four lives. The expected evil effect – the loss of one life – is the tolerated evil effect. As others have explained, the principle of the double effect can then be applied.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
That is the fallacy of insufficient alternatives. In the real world situation, there will always be alternatives, such as jumping on the train and applying the brakes to stop the train. I have seen James Bond perform similar feats. In that scenario, everyone will be saved.
D
dshix
Guest
Don’t be silly. We’re talking about a hypothetical situation, not real life. Hypothetical questions are useful because they help us learn the principles which govern our actions in extreme situations; they are not an invitation for you to try and find reasons why the hypothetical should not be asked at all.
Oh, and James Bond is a fictional character, by the way.
R
Rau
Guest
Of course that’s what you do in real life Tom, because you’re not aware that the trolley was in for maintenance, and the brake assembly was removed, prior to its use in this dastardly scenario. You see, it’s all about what you do when you realise that you know no means to save all, but you realise you do know how to save a subset. Doing nothing saves one subset (one man), and flipping the lever saves the other subset (4 men).
The first question to consider is - would I, as an observer concerned for the good, act morally by flipping the lever to save the 4?
And it is often the case that there are no good alternatives to protect or save all those at grave risk. Sometimes even the “best” of the moral options fails to prevent dreadful outcomes.
B
BornInMarch
Guest
Well said!
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Although the name James Bond is fictional, the character James Bond is based, at least partially, on the British super spy, Commander Forest Yeo-Thomas whose dangerous real life missions are strikingly similar to those of Ian Fleming’s character, British secret agent James Bond.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Who ordered the train to run with its brake assembly removed? I think a severe punishment is in order, perhaps even the highest possible, for a superior who gave the green light to run a train without the brake assembly. These are safety features that must be checked before a train is allowed to operate.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
I don’t think so. What if it was found out later on that the four people you saved had been convicted mass murderers and they were all subject to being executed in a month from now, because of their heinous crimes. And the one person who you decided to kill, instead of the four murderers, was the good Catholic father of seven children. He had just been awarded the medal of father of the year by the local Catholic clergy in recognition of his work for the church, for the poor and for his example of what a good Catholic father should be. Then what? You killed the one man who was a hero to everyone, and let the four mass murderers live? What kind of a horrible choice was that? What are you going to say to the wife and seven children of this dead man who you decided, on your own, to kill by flipping the switch?
You say it is a " tolerated evil effect", but how can anyone tolerate saving four mass murderers who were going to be executed anyway, by flipping a switch to murder one decent Catholic father?
R
Rau
Guest
I’m with you there, Agent Tom!
But now please tell us: would I, as an observer concerned for the good, act morally by flipping the lever to save the 4?
R
Rau
Guest
That does not answer the clear question I posed. The morality of this act is not influenced by things our hero does not know about the 5 men. Are you able to answer the question Tom?
T
Tomdstone
Guest
You know that I have already given my answer. I would reject the hypothesis of only two alternatives as unrealistic, false, and totally improbable. I would work to save everyone, just as the James Bond character does. Also, apparently you have read post # 35 and have not changed your mind about throwing the switch. My understanding is that you will throw the switch (is that correct)? If so, (and this is the assumption that I am working on), you have not told us what you are going to do about the wife and seven children who are now in despair over your decision to throw the switch and kill their loving father instead of letting the four mass murderers die. The four people who you saved were set to be executed anyway.The lives of the widow and her seven children are now ruined by your decision. What are you going to tell them? You seem content to say “The morality of this act is not influenced by things our hero does not know about the 5 men.” First of all, you should have known about this because it was reported in the news which you did not read. Secondly, these philosophical speculations, ruminations, and theories of yours are seen as worthless, hollow, empty and totally bogus to the wife and mother of the seven children who now live in agony, despair, sorrow, hardship and heartache for their entire lives because of what you did. Their father has been brutally killed as a result of your throwing the switch. Please tell us, what you are going to do about this family whose happiness and joy you have wrecked and will be felt as long as they live on earth. What are you going to tell these innocent children when they ask you why can’t I be with my father?
Are you going to say, well, killing your father was a “tolerated evil effect” ?
Oh, and by the way, let’s take a look at what the Sacred Scriptures says about this: Proverbs 6:17 : God hates the hand that sheds innocent blood.
What will you tell the children when they quote this verse to you?
R
Rau
Guest
What I know is that you have thrice refused to answer the very simple question I asked. The answer to the question is either yes, or no. And answering it does not require you to declare anything about what you would actually do in the scenario described. It does not require you to consider the wife and children of the one man (who it turns out was a fraud), nor the wife and children of the 4 men (who it turns out are Nobel laureates who have devoted their lives to peace and disarmament). You do not and could not know any of this - it has never been reported. You are simply asked to answer:
“Would an observer concerned for the good, act morally by flipping the lever to save the 4?”
[Note: The observer has judged he is unable to save all 5.]
- Status