Or shitty philosophy profs and their shitty students love oversimplified examples because they are easy to understand, than understanding the deeper social contexts and texts around which morality and moral disputes actaully constructed.
this type of ‘moral problem’ is actually specifically designed to be devoid of such context, because context is too difficult and fraught to deal with for the prof and the students, esp in a intro level coursework which in these idealized euristics types of questions that have little to no bearing on real world questions of how to treat others.
and all these type of question really is is just ‘which is the lesser evil’.
and every corporate/applied ethics course is full of nonsense like this. because it’s not about morality, it’s about abstract problem solving and argumentation… which is precisely the approach that makes corporate management often so fucking evil towards human beings in general.
stuff like this essentially is teaching people that ‘being good’ is basically the ability to elaborating justify doing evil, or , worse, creating plausible deniability of your corporate or personal agency.
which is also, sadly, why it’s so wildly popular.
Kinda weird how there’s no “this isn’t my business and there’s no reason this should be my problem, I’m just gonna call the police” option in The Trolly Problem.
because it’s a game. it’s not reality. it’s like the prisoner’s dilemma, it’s also a game.
you are suppose to ‘solve’ the ‘problem’ within the defined rules of the game space.
If it’s a game, how come it isn’t treated like a game? If I saw a guy tying people to train tracks I would probably call the cops because I’m not in a movie and I’m not about to lose my life for god knows why. If there was a big lever, I wouldn’t pull it, because I have no experience with managing a train. That is legitimately the only realistic answer to this question. Most people are smart enough do to the same thing. Most people wouldn’t even know what the lever is for, especially if they’re in the middle of witnessing a murder. I’m sure most wouldn’t have their best thinking cap on in that situation.
My usual universal solution to most trolley problem derivatives is “do nothing and claim you froze in shock in court”
Well if you call the cops you’ve done all that is required of you. I guess you could also call the engineer.
Call? The trolley is usually pictured right in front of everything.
Once you touch the lever you become legally liable.
I’m at least whipping my dick out, I’ll tell you that
Intention is all any of us control.
Wrong
that’s what shitty evil people think.
they had good intentions, therefore whatever horrible things happened to their objective shitty actions, were good.
and if you dare to suggest they are accountable for their actions, to them its you who is evil.
No, that’s what the Buddha and Jesus and countless others across countless worlds across countless eons have said. But you’re familiar with phenomequalitesselation, yea?
Can I chose which ones exactly?
You are a moral philosophy professor…
You wish!
bonus
extra bonus
Apparently I can put spoilers inside of spoilers!!
:::
This image I’m sure is burned into all of our brains :-)
Nah, my cat is in charge of it for me and fortunately he was hunting lizards that episode
Edit wait fuck that makes me orange help
Does this make it all better-er-est?
that is not a fish so no
edit DAMMIT STEVE
Sadly the extra extra bonus doesn’t get collapsed on all mobile clients!
Is it still collapsed the first time and it just uncollapses too soon along with the first button press, or does it never get collapsed at all?
Either way it’s a fun little test that doesn’t ruin anything… this time, so I’m glad to learn about it:-D.
Thank you for the feedback on how it looks differently to you than to me, that’s neat.
This is what it looks like to me. Still a fun surprise but I wanted to warn you about it lest you come to rely on it
spoiler
And I am so glad that you did, bc otherwise I might have!:-)
This is why everyone hates moral philosophy professors, Chidi
Well, if I do it, I’m now a Professor of Applied Moral Philosophy…
Of course. But I would do it for the love of the game, not a paycheck.
One of my favorite videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33VUuu2fb1I
Welp, I just spent a few hours consuming her entire YouTube. Bravo.
Just one piece of constructive criticism: I think she missed a great opportunity to have a profound conversation with the omniscient portal that opened up in the laundromat.
Oh hell yeah, rigging is real fun
If I don’t, an AI will so… fuck it. Might as well.
Nah … I just tie people to rails for the fun of it … now turn around and put your hands behind your back
I hope you also have a thin handlebar mustache that you twirl while cackling or the experience would be ruined.
No I don’t … but you can also turn around and put your hands behind your back
No. I would tie them to the tracks for fun.
I wouldn’t be a professor of moral philosophy if I did shit like this just at work.
you are an economist. eliminating zoning laws and HOAs would make construction of houses cheaper, saving lots of people lots of money, but the construction companies would be less profitable. do you argue in favor of unnecessarily complex building codes sothat the company stays profitable at the expense of the population?
That depends. How much is the population offering me to advocate in favor of them, and how much are the construction companies offering?
what if it’s the population who wants you to use the zoning laws and HOAs to restrict the supply so the value of their investment in their home doubles every 10-15 years?
and the developers have nothing to do with it. because waht they do is just build luxury housing now becaues it has a higher margin than non-luxury units, and you can only build a handful of homes each year in this town thanks to the zoning laws.
Gotta add on another level.
Zoning laws and HOA’s give larger construction companies a significant competitive advantage over smaller companies. This limits competition and drives up the cost while also degrading the average quality of the construction as the larger companies seek to maximize profits.
I’ve never seen an economist argue is favor of non-safety related building codes. Ever.
I’m an absurdist and I have a shitty degree in economics if you want to check something off your bucket list
If you can hold the mandatory economist’s compulsion to be liberal for long enough to write a coherent argument for that intervention, I’m willing to count it and update my opinion.
define liberal. i know seven definitions
Somebody that defends personal freedom.
Okay, give me some time I am off for the night. Wait until I am high as fuck and trying to sleep or just had some good coffee and an empanada on… Friday?
