1

Let me make the question more specific. In the open course <Justice: what's the right thing to do?> a lot of extreme examples have been discussed. For example:

  1. the trolley car problem: to kill one or kill five.
  2. the crew of four: sacrifice one person for the rest.

What could be the use to do those discussions in the sense of morality? In consideration of that

  1. the extreme examples happen rarely in daily life. So most people have not experienced those examples directly and maybe never have that chance.
  2. how can an inexperienced person have her/his real opinion. She/He might change the opinion vertically once she/he is involved in the real case. Especially in some rarely happened events.
causative
  • 10,452
  • 1
  • 13
  • 45
Eden Harder
  • 119
  • 2
  • 1
    They bring moral dilemmas into sharp relief and block escape routes typically available in daily life, rather than sidestep one is forced to confront and resolve them one way or the other. The point is to think those ways through ahead of time instead of relying on shifting emotional "opinions" when the time comes. And then it may led one to rethink those habitual "opinions" they uncritically accept even in daily life. – Conifold Jan 17 '21 at 08:46
  • 1
    @DavidBlomstrom it's a daily occurrence for nearly all of us. We all rely on the industrial economy for our daily survival, and that industry, directly and indirectly, kills a non-zero number of people every day. Surely multiple people died in car accidents on their way to work this morning. Surely multiple got mangled in factory accidents all across the world today. Surely many people inhaled pollution that will cause a fatal cancer. Every product and service we consume is, on some level, choosing to pull the trolley switch. – Ryan_L Jan 21 '21 at 06:04

0 Answers0