The Trolley Problem.

You've probably already heard of this one before. The Trolley Problem, introduced by English philosopher Philippa Foot, is a famous philosophical dilemma. Originating from 1967, the simple thought problem has stumped normal people and philosophers alike. Although the question is fairly simple, many factors can be added to it to enhance the problem, and various variations of the dilemma have been invented.

The original scenario goes like so; You are in front of a railroad with an oncoming trolley. Beside you is a lever, which is already set to the left. There is a railroad switch in front of it, which is also set to the left. Continuing on the left path, there are five people in danger of being killed by the trolley if it continues on its path. When you look across the right path, there is one person standing on it. Would you pull the lever to divert the trolley to the right, or would you not do anything and let the trolley continue on the left?

Most people respond that they would pull the lever and divert the trolley to the right. They claim that the simple reason is math; only one person dying is more beneficial than five people dying. Now, many people can refute this by acknowledging the fact that if you pull the lever, you are making an active effort to murder a person, when you could do absolutely nothing at all. However, this brings up another question: Is doing nothing really harmless? Even if it may seem like you did not affect the situation, the elephant in the room is that you saw five people in peril and you chose to not do anything to help them.

Here's where things get interesting. Right now, this dilemma is not a real dilemma. Sure, one can be conflicted on what to do in this scenario, but most people will pick to pull the lever as the people dying are not connected to them whatsoever. It would be an entirely different story if the people in danger are connected to you. For example, if the five people were your family members who you loved deeply, no matter who the other person is, you would (most likely) choose to pull the lever. Or, if one person was your significant other whilst the others were complete strangers, you would likely choose the former.

This variant entirely changes the original thought process, though. The original thought was, would you consciously kill five people by doing nothing or actively pull the lever to murder one person? Now, since the people who will die are connected to you, you start to leverage their lives on who matters more to you, rather than the fact that you are consciously killing them. You start to weigh who plays a more important role in your life.

Putting that variant aside, let's take a look at another idea that you have probably not considered before. What would you feel if you changed positions in this scenario? What if you were the single person on the right whilst the other five people were on the left, and you had the power to divert the trolley? Would you sacrifice yourself in order to save five other people, or would you value your life over theirs?

This scenario is not meant to guilt-trip anyone, but to put a fresh new perspective on the trolley problem. Some people may say they would choose to save the other five people, but most likely, under a real scenario, people would want to save their own skin. It makes sense, as this is human nature. We, humans, are always calculating the risks, benefits, and consequences of our actions.

However, one can only think deeply about this scenario if we combine the two variants we talked about today. Would you sacrifice yourself to save five family members or five close friends? One can add more and more information to the problem, such as the individual identities of the five people. It is much easier to see the group as strangers and determine their fates when we do not know their memories.

What if one of them is a young child? One an elderly woman? One a pregnant woman? One a military veteran who fought for his country? One an abandoned child? Adding more and more details will further cloud the judgment of the reader, which is one of the things that makes this trolley problem famous.

In the end, there really is no right answer. Some people may choose to go the factual route and choose to kill one person instead of five, while others may go the emotional route and decide to not do anything. Try to think of your own variations of the scenario to keep it interesting; what if there were five people on one side and five people on the other as well? What would determine their fates? Do you even have the right to decide who gets killed and who lives on?

Try not to be too hard on yourself if you can't land on one answer. Hopefully, this will stay as a fun thought experiment and won't actually happen to you. In fact, try asking people you know about the dilemma and see what they think. Their opinion might open your eyes to a whole other side of the story you didn't even think about. Personally, I don't know if I'll be able to come to a decision unless it actually happens to me and I have only a few seconds to think about it, and that's okay. What about you? Share your thoughts on the Trolley Problem in the comments below.

…

This concludes the analysis of The Trolley Problem. New chapter will be up shortly.

Until then, departed_sir.