New moral question | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

New moral question

If the six people on the track were tied up or otherwise unable to escape (by the twisted design some other party), I would send the train towards the three workers. Their families would have an easier getting compensation from the company, after all. Otherwise, I would send it towards the six
 
Sithious said:
Personally I would have let the 6 adults die, simply because they shouldn't have been there and must take responsibility for their actions, which in this case is death.

Also I choose quality over quantity and I might do humanity a service by sparing it for these clearly not so intelligent individuals. I mean being in the railway tracks is not a stroke of genius...
Click to expand...

If I didn't have another choice I would choose this option. Clearly because it's just plain stupid to be in a place like that, it's like I went ahead and put my fingers on fire and expect not to get burned.

This decision would suck if I was in that situation but nevertheless the most reasonable and maybe after that incident we could make some rules to stop this from happening in the future such as putting an electric fence around the tracks or train patrols watching over the area.
 
I'd attempt to get people off the tracks.

If I was unsuccesful in this, I'd probably let it continue on. It wouldn't be fair to those workers who were just there doing their job.

Aye aye aye, I hate that kind of death.
:m142: I'd probably be really messed up after such an event. Also, I would hope and pray no one would bug me about my decision.
 
Sithious said:
Personally I would have let the 6 adults die, simply because they shouldn't have been there and must take responsibility for their actions, which in this case is death.

Also I choose quality over quantity and I might do humanity a service by sparing it for these clearly not so intelligent individuals. I mean being in the railway tracks is not a stroke of genius...
Click to expand...


What if the 6 adults were recently in the paper for being on the verge of curing childhood cancer. Also you just happen to know that they are lost on a hike and are trying to get across the tracks to more familiar territory.
 
I wouldn't kill the workers just cuz a couple of loafers are fooling around where they shouldn't be. I wouldn't just put my feet up and plow into them, though. Don't I have a horn or lights or something to warn them with?
 
I'll just ask that cause I don't get it. How come most people consider the six people to be guilty of something? They happened to be there, yes, while they shouldn't, but that does not constitute some sort of crime or unethical action. They just happened to be there in the wrong time. How come they suddenly became 6 Hitlers? And why are the workers' lives more important that the lives of the 6 people? Just because they were meant to be there?
 
Creon said:
I'll just ask that cause I don't get it. How come most people consider the six people to be guilty of something? They happened to be there, yes, while they shouldn't, but that does not constitute some sort of crime or unethical action. They just happened to be there in the wrong time. How come they suddenly became 6 Hitlers? And why are the workers' lives more important that the lives of the 6 people? Just because they were meant to be there?
Click to expand...

That's an excellent question. I considered that while pondering my answer, as well.


I thought of the worker's families at home expecting them to return as they always have each day. I thought of the workers who expected to finish up a day's work and go home to their lives. I don't want to say that anyone's life is more important than anyone elses, but I guess I'm going to have to.

Suddenly, it seemed wrong that the workers should lose their lives when they are doing what was expected of them because some other people were unconsciously putting themselves and others at risk for death. I suppose that says something about the way I view order and law.
 
True, it does seem that the 6 others have taken on that connotation.

My decision still stands, though.
 
Creon said:
I'll just ask that cause I don't get it. How come most people consider the six people to be guilty of something? They happened to be there, yes, while they shouldn't, but that does not constitute some sort of crime or unethical action. They just happened to be there in the wrong time. How come they suddenly became 6 Hitlers? And why are the workers' lives more important that the lives of the 6 people? Just because they were meant to be there?
Click to expand...

They were victims of circumstance. I didn't say that they were criminals but why should the workers pay the price for the irresponsibility of others? I'm pretty sure that the 6 people know that being in a train track is dangerous so why risk the chance of getting killed? Though there's no way of knowing what business the people had there, they could be terrorist placing a bomb as far as I know.

The workers on the other hand I know that they're there for a purpose, they must have families to feed or others depending on them.

It's sad to see these people die but it must serve as an example for other people in the future that one should be more aware where they place themselves into.
 
It doesn't make sense to say your options are to move the train or do nothing. Trains have horns and speakers and lights and what not for this purpose. That's my loophole so I can rest easy. Said it earlier, I'd use what I could to warn the six.

Creon, why would you send it for the three workers?
 
alt ctrl del said:
That's an excellent question. I considered that while pondering my answer, as well.


I thought of the worker's families at home expecting them to return as they always have each day. I thought of the workers who expected to finish up a day's work and go home to their lives. I don't want to say that anyone's life is more important than anyone elses, but I guess I'm going to have to.

Suddenly, it seemed wrong that the workers should lose their lives when they are doing what was expected of them because some other people were unconsciously putting themselves and others at risk for death. I suppose that says something about the way I view order and law.
Click to expand...

The workers on the other hand I know that they're there for a purpose, they must have families to feed or others depending on them.
Click to expand...
I understand what you mean, but I suppose the 6 people had families of their own. Or, they could be 6 people in their 20s, just passing trough to see something they wanted to see. Looking at it from the f perspective works in both cases.

What I don't understand is how come such a meaningless decision (like to walk on the tracks) would be enough of a reason to justify their deaths instead of the workers. In other words, I am doudting the idea that their decision to walk on tracks was somehow wrong or false.
Creon, why would you send it for the three workers?
Click to expand...
The way I see it, it's just an unfortunate situation. It's nobody's fault. Having said that, I don't consider the workers lives more important than the other peoples' lives. So it comes down to numbers. 6 vs 3. I just chose the lesser of two evils.
 
Last edited:
Creon said:
I understand what you mean, but I suppose the 6 people had families of their own. Or, they could be 6 people in their 20s, just passing trough to see something they wanted to see. Looking at it from the f perspective works in both cases.

What I don't understand is how come such a meaningless decision (like to walk on the tracks) would be enough of a reason to justify their deaths instead of the workers. In other words, I am doudting the idea that their decision to walk on tracks was somehow wrong or false.
The way I see it, it's just an unfortunate situation. It's nobody's fault. Having said that, I don't consider the workers lives more important than the other peoples' lives. So it comes down to numbers. 6 vs 3. I just chose the lesser of two evils.
Click to expand...

Ok, let me change the scenario a little bit Creon. What would you do if there were 3 workers and 3 random people on the tracks about to be killed? How would you formulate your decision?
 
Last Dawn said:
Ok, let me change the scenario a little bit Creon. What would you do if there were 3 workers and 3 random people on the tracks about to be killed? How would you formulate your decision?
Click to expand...


Hmmm. I am not sure. I don't think it would really matter to me then. I suppose I wouldn't change the train's direction, so as to avoid terrorizing the passengers or risking minor injuries.
 
Last edited:
One way or another, people are going to die. I'm not going to change my direction and purposely sacrifice three people who, I've been notified ahead of time, would be there. That's pre-meditated murder. Who I am to decide that someone's life is worth sacrificing?

If there's six people hanging around on the train track, they're responsible for their own lives. I didn't know they were going to be there when I got to my job this morning, and there's nothing I can ostensibly do to prevent the circumstances that won't put other lives in danger.

They gotta move it or lose it.
 
Last edited:
hm, i would send the train towards the six people because
1) they're technically not supposed to be there in the first place, so they have to deal with the consequences..:\
2) the three workers are there to perform maintenance work; without them, in the future, the train could be derailed and kill even more people
 
Creon said:
I'll just ask that cause I don't get it. How come most people consider the six people to be guilty of something? They happened to be there, yes, while they shouldn't, but that does not constitute some sort of crime or unethical action. They just happened to be there in the wrong time. How come they suddenly became 6 Hitlers? And why are the workers' lives more important that the lives of the 6 people? Just because they were meant to be there?
Click to expand...

Train lines are fenced off. To be there is userssbsping.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
Shai Gar said:
Train lines are fenced off. To be there is userssbsping.
Posted via Mobile Device
Click to expand...


trespassing? if yes, i agree. besides, trains are loud and no one is trapped or tied up damsel-in-distress style, right? run, SMF's!
 
Let it go to the 6 adults.
They shouldn't be there, and that's reason enough to override the "number of lives involved" consideration for me.



Sithious said:
First of all this is a highly unrealistic scenario, but here goes.

You're a train controller or whatever it's called.

As you are in the controll tower you see the train you are responisble for headed towards 6 adults who are in the railway track for some reason, who shouldn't be there.

You have the choice of doing nothing, or sending the train into the another direction, however in that other direction there are 3 workers who are supposed to be there as they are performing maintenance work on the track.

The train is moving too fast for the train operator to stop it and the flute is broken. So that the scenario is, the people in the direction it is sent or not sent will die.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back