• howrar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    20 days ago

    It’s an abstraction over many real world scenarios.

    Example: You are one of two people in the hospital waiting for an organ transplant. One becomes available, and it’s basically guaranteed that there won’t be another arriving in time to help both of you. You can exert influence to get that transplant, and so can the other person. Do you do it?

    Who put you into this situation and what crimes should they be charged with?

      • greenbit@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        Not to call anyone out but trying to be literal, contextualize and overanalyze abstract though experiments is one of the neurodivergent test questions

        And this is no way means to be assigning value, more of an awareness notion

      • Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        It isn’t a different scenario.

        The point is that it is a hypothetical situation where you have to decide whether you want to influence an other persons death if it might save yours or not. The context does not matter at all.

        You don’t get other options, you have to choose. And based on your answer, you will reveal your morality.

        You put these in the same context, like a trolley problem, so you can easily compare them to other problems.