The Trolly Problem
During lockdown I discovered ‘The Good Place’, Mike Schur’s brilliant tv series documenting the afterlife and the quest of some of its cast members to, among other things, become more ethical. In one episode they discuss several variations the trolly problem. Following this episode I spent a long time thinking through the problem and while there is no objectively correct answer, that’s practically a requirement of philosophy, I did discover a thing or two and wanted to share here.
The variations
The Switch (the original): a trolly is rolling down a track towards a junction. The junction splits two ways. Down one track are five people who will be hit and killed if the trolley heads down their track. Down the second track is a single person who will likewise be killed if the trolley heads down their track. You are standing at the junction able to direct the trolly down either track. If you do nothing the trolley will head down the first track killing five people. Should you switch the junction or let it continue?
The Loop: As in the switch but in this case the second track re-joins the first ahead of the five people but the body of the first person will slow the trolley preventing it from killing the other five
The Fat Man (not a great name): As in both previous scenarios we have a trolley on a track but in this case there’s no junction and the trolly is heading straight for the five people. In this case there is a fat man in front of you, next to the track. If you push him onto the track he will be killed but the resistance will save the lives of the five others.
The Hitman (also the transplant): as with the fat man except he can resist you. In this scenario you will need to kill the fat man (painlessly) in order to get him onto the track.
The Fat Villain: as with the fat man except the fat man is responsible for the whole situation.
The Thinking
There are 3 basic frameworks of ethical thinking, Utilitarianism, Deontology, and Virtue Ethics. I’m going to look at these scenarios through each of these frameworks and hopefully come to a conclusion
Utilitarianism simply looks at the consequences of an action or scenario with actions that improve good/pleasure or reduce suffering/pain the most being preferable. In a pure utilitarian maths terms the answer seems obvious one death is preferable to five death so we should intervene. Utilitarianism doesn’t concern itself with methods except for the good or harm they do. Arguably you should intervene in all 5 cases. The first four scenarios are identical from a utilitarian point of view, one innocent painlessly dead 5 people saved. In the Fat Villain utilitarianism would probably make the case that killing a villain capable of producing such a scenario would likely result in preventing future harm and so there is an even greater moral imperative to intervene.
Deontology focuses on rules, it consists of identifying and ranking the ethical rules of our society so that you can use them to assess a given situation and always act in the most ethical way possible. Deontology is not interesting in outcomes and the father of the school, Emmanuel Kant, was famously against any “ends justifying means” thinking. In this case the maths takes a back seat. “Do not kill” is at the top of most Deontological rules and therefore taking any action that will kill a person is wrong and saving five others is a lesser concern. That said some Deontologists would put “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” in this case they would happily intervene. Additionally, as you progress through the first 4 scenarios any intervention will incur breaking further rules. In The Switch you are taking an action that will kill then but you are not committing violence on their person directly, their death is a by-product of saving five people. In The Loop you are still not committing direct violence by you are using someone against their will. In The Fat Man you are directly committing violence in addition to using them while The Hitman is directly killing a person and using their corpse.
Finally we have virtue ethics. This focuses on character (or virtue) of the individual taking action and the damage each of your actions do to your character. This this case there is a hard line between The Loop and The Fat Man. Acting as an agent directly upon the individual would make the person a Murderer, an unacceptable blemish of character. It is the agency and the direct application of violence that demarks the just about acceptable from the unacceptable.
Conclusion
While I would like to think of myself as primarily a Utilitarian I’m not sure I could act as such in these cases chiefly because I don’t think I could ever be certain enough of the outcome to deliberately sacrifice someone, let alone directly murder them. I feel I definitely could intervene on The Switch and I definitely couldn’t on The Fat Man, the weight of having directly killed a human being would simply be too much for me. The one I am honestly not sure on is The Loop. I feel I could intervene if I was certain, totally certain, it would stop the trolley but I don’t know that I could ever reach that level of certainty.
Afterword
I initially came across this problem when I was a teenager. Back then I only covered two scenarios, The Switch and The Fat Man and I recall thinking I would have been perfectly fine intervening in either scenario. I forgot about the problem and it passed by my twenties before resurfacing now, in my 30’s. I find it curious that my attitude has changed. Maybe it was teenage bravado or inexperience to think that I could commit the act of directly killing a person to save five but I feel slightly conflicted on the change. I may just be weaker or less confident than I was as a teenager but I like to think that I now have more humility and more nuance to my character. A character that looks past the facts presented to the nature of the facts, potential issues in my own thinking, and the impact any one decision I make will have not just on the matter directly at hand but on the wider world that I interact with, and of course on myself.
International survey on the trolly problem:
