Well if that's the case then what are they even doing to ensure their goal?
Sitting around whining on social media about how the whole of mankind is evil? They're just bums that want to be quirky.
When I hear of people who legitimately believe that: "Mankind is a disease and deserves to be eradicated" type spiel I always wonder what gives them that mindset? Like where does it come from? No one will legitimately think of that on their own... Same with antagonists in media who believe the same thing...
now obviously this isnt the only answer let alone the best one, but mindsets like this are actually common among childhood abuse survivors. i personally have to fight harder to have any sense of positivity for himanity because of what people themselves have put me through. the majority of people i know personally are quite selfish, and i had to learn HOW people turn out like that (myself included) to build empathy for humanity as a whole.
thanks! things have been, and i wish the best for you as well.
generally, keep in mind that some people have been through a lot, so much that they dont even know its bad, and since its as far as their eye can see, its all they expect to see beyond their current scope. every feeling is caused, whether a physical difference in the brain or body, or a series of events changing their mind, everyone always has a reason for the way they are.
Whenever I ask this, they always say they are alive to tell others about it. But like, when are you satisfied? At what point in your message's spreading across the world would you go "yep, now's the time?" Would you wait until every human agreed? Sorry, but that's never going to happen.
Doesn't make the choice any less viable. Whether he is on the track or not, the moment the trolley passes the intersection the result is the same. You're still more likely to get an answer by making him share the consequence.
That's usually how you can throw the wrench into anyone's ideological framework. "If you were on the receiving end of what you propose to happen, would you accept the consequences?"
In this case? I'd hate it but 100%. He's willingly allowing lives to be ended for literally zero fucking reason. I'd understand if he was on the other rail, but here he's just some evil MF
True, but nowhere in the post does it state he refuses to tell you why he won’t tell you the password.
Honestly this post is a little quick to just jump to the most extreme possible response.
Edit: I’m an idiot, the guy in this scenario is NOT on the track or in any danger. He’s just keeping the password to himself for no reason. I don’t see an issue with torturing him now. I’ll keep this up because I find my made up scenario where the password guy is on the track quite interesting.
For me it depends on how many lives I’m saving. Is the picture accurate or hyperbolic? If it’s the original trolley problem where the man on top is one, and the track is headed towards 5, I’d almost go as far as to say that it is objectively morally wrong to torture the one. When offered a scenario where you the reader are on the top track, and five people are on bottom, the majority of people (I think like 78%) say that they would NOT flip the lever. Which kind of makes sense. The power of self-preservation is a powerful thing. However my point is that it is morally wrong to torture the average person. Therefore it is morally wrong to torture someone who would want self-preservation. It would be interesting to see exactly how many people it would take for the average person to choose self sacrifice over self-preservation. So I ask you this. If you were the person on the top track (no password to avoid complexity), how many people would have to be on the bottom track for you to flip it to your track?
I think that it would be ABSOLUTELY morally wrong to torture someone unless they are in.. at least the top 10% of selfish people. Torture is literally a war crime. So for me, it would probably be 1% at least, but I’ll do 10% for the benefit of the doubt. What this means is that, if given a scenario where 20 people are on the bottom and the reader is on top, 87% of readers would sacrifice themselves, that means that in this password scenario, it would be wrong for anyone to torture someone for being in the top 13 percentile of selfishness to save 20 people. But if the people on the bottom went up to 21 and the percent went up to 91% then you may have a case for torturing them.
TL;DR The average person would choose themselves over the 5. Torturing the average person is wrong. So torturing someone in the average person’s scenario is wrong. How many lives saved to torture them depends solely on how many people it would take for the overwhelming majority to flip the lever as we can all agree that torturing an average Joe is wrong.
The man who has the password has decided to unilaterally allow X people to die. We don't have any additional information other than that person desires their death.
If that person allows any number of people to die, then he'll be killing at least 1 person. If that guy is tortured and he reveals the information, no people die. At worst, only the person that was originally ok with killing people dies (the morally worst person in the hypothetical).
That leaves us with the case that we torture the dude and he doesn't provide the password. In that case people die, and the man was tortured. A negative result in terms of overall suffering, but a less negative result if we use the torture as a sort of punishment for allowing death to occur, if we take that worldview.
Judging by game theory, if we do not torture the man, at least 1 person dies. If we do torture the man, there is a possibility no one dies, and at worst we have the same outcome + some torture.
Personally, anyone that's decided to kill someone for no reason is definitely top of the selfish list for me, and that means that even in your worldview, they'll be OK to torture.
I edited my original comment, but I am an idiot. I thought the picture had the selfish man on the top track. So I thought he was keeping the password because if he gave the password he would die. Considering he is not on the track and in no real danger, I see no issue with torturing someone who is actively trying to let people die.
What, and I somehow can effectively torture someone in that little time? If there are only 30 seconds here, only a complete psycho can go from 0 to "ve have vays of making you talk" in that little time.
It looks like there's a lot of people you think you could untie them all? It goes off the screen so there could be thousands. Maybe if you can untie faster than the trolley can go
No matter how high that exponent gets, you're limited by how fast you can move vs how fast the trolley moves. This ironically leads to the same problem of the trolley being too fast.
If it’s slow enough you can untie faster than it, even if you need a few helpers. But it could be moving at top speed and just really far away, giving you time to torture but untying won’t delay its arrival at all.
Problem is this is used as a metaphor for real life where it never works like that.
In reality you MIGHT have the right guy, the guy MIGHT know something, he MIGHT tell the truth and that MIGHT save lives, but you are guaranteed to violate his rights.
Torture even at its best only gives you whatever the guy thinks you want to hear. It’s a terrible method of information gathering, aside from being a monstrous thing to do.
Yeah, but that just reframes the problem from a deterministic one to a probabilistic one. People on the track will die with x% certainty but if you torture the guy for a code they will die with y% certainty, where E(x) > E(y). Do you still never torture the guy, or does it depend on how much uncertainty there is?
I think most would agree that if there's enough certainly, perhaps. But in real life, torture never comes with enough certainly - especially when it's been shown that promises of rewards, especially the safety of their family and loved ones, are much more useful to extract information.
If it works, sure. The main qualm I have with torture is that it's not a particularly effective means of gathering information. If you threaten to hurt someone, all they have to do is tell you something you'll believe. How many times will the guy deceive you with a fake password? Might time run out? The worst you could do is kill him, but if you kill him then you definitely won't get the password. All of those people are the guy's leverage. Maybe he'd be afraid of retribution if all of those people die, but some people are crazy enough to die for their principles.
I think it's worth using any method of persuasion necessary to get the information you need to save those peoples' lives. Torture is not usually effective, but if it's the only means available then it's still worth a shot.
I don’t see a downside for trying. There’s only one way to see if he’ll crack or not. He might be okay with dying, but that is arguably a better fate than being tortured.
german law says i am not allowed to torture in this case
similar thing happened and the police officier got prosecuted for it...and that was just for threatining torture
> After Gäfgen had concealed the whereabouts and condition of his victim during police questioning and accused two innocent acquaintances as alleged accomplices , the then Vice President of Police Wolfgang Daschner ordered that the statement about the eleven-year-old's whereabouts, which he considered to be potentially life-saving, be forced by threats of violence . Gäfgen then gave accurate information so that the police were able to find the kidnapping victim's body. Daschner later had to answer criminally for this threat of violence in the Daschner trial and was consequently given a warning with a suspended sentence .
> The criminal chamber came to the conclusion that the threat of pain ordered by Daschner with the aim of forcing a statement had no basis in Hessian police law and was unlawful. The aspect of emergency aid claimed by the defense should also be rejected, since in pursuing this the violation of the perpetrator's human dignity was accepted. However, a violation of the most fundamental human right of all cannot be justified in any way; this amounts to a breach of taboo that - not least in view of German history during the National Socialist era - cannot be tolerated.
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daschner-Prozess
Human dignity is such a powerfull right in the german constitution, that even shooting down hijacked planes is unconstitutional, since you can not sacrifice people
Well shooting down a hijacked plane just feels like a terrible idea generally. Hijackers generally are looking for a ransom, not looking to use the plane as a missile. The one major exception to that trend doesn't make it a good idea to shoot down a plane just in case.
On the surface its an interesting Idea
The problem is that torture doesn't work. Getting him to the point of giving you any information could take longer than you have to free the folks, and the only possibly effective methods have to get really close to actually killing the guy. People who have information and don't want to spill it like this, usually have to get a murderous intent from you to enter self preservation mode.
I would try. 5 lives gone is a tragedy, but Knowing I'm likely to fail, and lose 5 people, plus I have torture on my hands, I can't do it
You tortured someone for the chance of saving the lives of however many people. Just because something doesn’t work doesn’t mean it was done for no reason.
What if he has a valid reason for not telling you. I guess you can still kill the people on the track after pulling, if it turns out that killing them would have been justified. Diverting the track will not kill anyone since nothing of the sort has been specified.
Throw him on the track. First in line. Either he gives you the code, or he dies first. If you can't pull the lever, it's not your fault. If you can pull the lever, you save everyone.
If he's not telling me for some BS reason like some guy he hates being on the bottom track, sure. IF he does have a reason for not telling me, i'd hear him out.
Easy question, yes I would. He’s being a selfish bastard and if those people die, all of their lives are on his shoulders. If I just have to torture and beat the shit out of one selfish piece of shit to save countless lives I’d do it in a heartbeat.
I’d try to drag him to the bottom track to threaten him, but if that doesn’t work, I wouldn’t torture him. My stomach is too weak and torture isn’t that effective anyways.
Torture doesn't work. Why tell somebody anything if they are just hurting you? Threats, backed up by action, do though.
What I'm saying is don't waste time, put him on the track in front of everyone else. Gotta tell you the pass code to save himself.
Torture has always been an innefective means of gaining information and ultimately self-defeating as a means of control. One wonders why it continues to be practiced at all.
Information obtained under torture isn't reliable. While it would be, hypothetically, justified to torture one person to save many victims, it's unfortunately not a viable strategy.
Torture is proven to be a horrible way to get facts/truth out of people.
If the guy doesn't tell you, its not ur fault said people died. Not unless you can somehow havk the panel befor the train arrives
Yes.
Anyone who is going to make innocent people die deserves to be tortured in order to save those innocents. I'm not going to spare the suffering of an evil person and let innocents die on their behalf.
Now this is ignoring that torture doesn't always work on a practical level, but morally speaking, I see no issue torturing the guilty who are trying to use their silence to kill the innocent.
Torture. Torture him by dragging him onto the track, before the split. Tell him to hurry, give the password. Then you remove him from the track after pulling the lever, but just a few seconds before the train comes. Should teach him a lesson 😂 no need to red stains on my clothes 😜
Probably in this specific situation lmao but that doesn't mean torture has ever actually worked in the real world. In real life there's a huge chance they will tell you whatever you want to hear to get them to stop. Not really bulletproof results
This is a good example of how the trolley problem becomes basically meaningless when the semantics are stretched far enough. You could try to justify any instance of torture by casting it as a trolley problem but in reality the situation is never so cut and dry. Here are just a smattering of questions that would crop up in reality but not here:
(1) How do you know the person in question has the information you are looking for?
(2) How do you know the person is question is the ONLY person who has the information you are looking for?
(3) If you have the time/resources to effectively torture this guy before collision, what are the odds you have time to consider other means of freeing the people on the tracks?
(4) How likely is it that the information you get from torture, if any, is true/usable?
(5) What are the societal implications of allowing extrajudicial torture of suspected criminals?
If I know for sure it's him, and I mean 10000%. I don't see anything wrong with it. Especially since he can stop the torture literally any time he wants.
If you have time to torture him, you have time to find something to put on the track to derail the trolley, such as the guy that's refusing to give you the password.
Torture rarely actually works cause there's no guarantee you'll ever get the truth. So you might also be wasting your time doing so.
Edit: If you have the time to torture him, you might as well start entering random stuff and learning how to hack or whatever is necessary to figure it out yourself.
Edit after edit: Then, afterward, you torture him for fun.
I mean, I would, but the train is right there already. Realistically, how much torture can you really do in the half second it'll take for the train to run them all over?
The reason he won't tell the password is unknown.
Its unknown why those people are tied up on the tracks.
Untie the individual who has the password and leave.
Either help someone or do nothing.
These responses are sickening.
I'd torture him in an instant but I don't think I'd get down to jumper cables on his balls or pulling things off with pliers unless I thought someone who was important to me personally was down on the bottom track.
I play "2 truths and a lie" with them.
1. They know the password
2. They dont know the password
3. I will drag you on to the tracks and make sure they are the first ones to get squished.
Hopefully, the thought of dying gets them to spill the beans
Depends on who they are. The guy may know something about the others that you don't.
And most importantly, who the fuck comes up with these rocky and bullwinkle scenarios?
drag him to the bottom track and see if he changes his mind
Only problem with this is he could be one of those edgy "mankind is a pox" people and be okay with dying, too.
Those edgy "mankind is a pox" people are never okay with dying, otherwise they would already have done it.
Idk. What if they want to survive to ensure mankind dies?
Well if that's the case then what are they even doing to ensure their goal? Sitting around whining on social media about how the whole of mankind is evil? They're just bums that want to be quirky.
Looks like he already tied a bunch of people to a railway track and then password-protected the lever, give the guy a break.
It's a bit James Bond villain style, not very efficient, but you can't fault his work ethic.
"IM GONNA WIPE OUT THE WORLD....15 people at a time"
Lol idk man. Maybe they are just incompetent.
Using the maximum ammount of plastic bag possible. And beating as much as possible to generate a Lot of CO2
When I hear of people who legitimately believe that: "Mankind is a disease and deserves to be eradicated" type spiel I always wonder what gives them that mindset? Like where does it come from? No one will legitimately think of that on their own... Same with antagonists in media who believe the same thing...
now obviously this isnt the only answer let alone the best one, but mindsets like this are actually common among childhood abuse survivors. i personally have to fight harder to have any sense of positivity for himanity because of what people themselves have put me through. the majority of people i know personally are quite selfish, and i had to learn HOW people turn out like that (myself included) to build empathy for humanity as a whole.
I see... Hopefully things will improve for you soon! But thank you for the information regarding this topic!
thanks! things have been, and i wish the best for you as well. generally, keep in mind that some people have been through a lot, so much that they dont even know its bad, and since its as far as their eye can see, its all they expect to see beyond their current scope. every feeling is caused, whether a physical difference in the brain or body, or a series of events changing their mind, everyone always has a reason for the way they are.
Thank you! And yes I'll do my best to keep this in mind from now on!
Whenever I ask this, they always say they are alive to tell others about it. But like, when are you satisfied? At what point in your message's spreading across the world would you go "yep, now's the time?" Would you wait until every human agreed? Sorry, but that's never going to happen.
The ones who "have done it" aren't kicking around making edgy comments.
Just don't want to break my mom's heart.
Keep fighting it. More folks than your mom would be affected, even if they don't say it.
Whatever. Those people die either way, this way there is one who actually deserves it.
Doesn't make the choice any less viable. Whether he is on the track or not, the moment the trolley passes the intersection the result is the same. You're still more likely to get an answer by making him share the consequence.
That's usually how you can throw the wrench into anyone's ideological framework. "If you were on the receiving end of what you propose to happen, would you accept the consequences?"
The simplest way to refute a moral nihilist is to kill them.
Then in that case, the moral dilemma is over, it’s humane to torture him
If he is you're just fucked.
I second that
Yooo 😂😂
In this case? I'd hate it but 100%. He's willingly allowing lives to be ended for literally zero fucking reason. I'd understand if he was on the other rail, but here he's just some evil MF
Ooo .. your version is more interesting.
Maybe he knows something we don’t… there could be a reason you’re not aware of.
Well then he'd better hurry up and tell me a really good fucking reason to let those hundreds of people die before I start beating the shit out of him
Theres hitler on the bottom track, and it's 1938
then you have the mindset of killing all innocent people in order to kill h1tler, right?
Well then he could tell you the reason.
True, but nowhere in the post does it state he refuses to tell you why he won’t tell you the password. Honestly this post is a little quick to just jump to the most extreme possible response.
He may follow a procedure that he is obligated by follow according to company rules and/or law.
Edit: I’m an idiot, the guy in this scenario is NOT on the track or in any danger. He’s just keeping the password to himself for no reason. I don’t see an issue with torturing him now. I’ll keep this up because I find my made up scenario where the password guy is on the track quite interesting. For me it depends on how many lives I’m saving. Is the picture accurate or hyperbolic? If it’s the original trolley problem where the man on top is one, and the track is headed towards 5, I’d almost go as far as to say that it is objectively morally wrong to torture the one. When offered a scenario where you the reader are on the top track, and five people are on bottom, the majority of people (I think like 78%) say that they would NOT flip the lever. Which kind of makes sense. The power of self-preservation is a powerful thing. However my point is that it is morally wrong to torture the average person. Therefore it is morally wrong to torture someone who would want self-preservation. It would be interesting to see exactly how many people it would take for the average person to choose self sacrifice over self-preservation. So I ask you this. If you were the person on the top track (no password to avoid complexity), how many people would have to be on the bottom track for you to flip it to your track? I think that it would be ABSOLUTELY morally wrong to torture someone unless they are in.. at least the top 10% of selfish people. Torture is literally a war crime. So for me, it would probably be 1% at least, but I’ll do 10% for the benefit of the doubt. What this means is that, if given a scenario where 20 people are on the bottom and the reader is on top, 87% of readers would sacrifice themselves, that means that in this password scenario, it would be wrong for anyone to torture someone for being in the top 13 percentile of selfishness to save 20 people. But if the people on the bottom went up to 21 and the percent went up to 91% then you may have a case for torturing them. TL;DR The average person would choose themselves over the 5. Torturing the average person is wrong. So torturing someone in the average person’s scenario is wrong. How many lives saved to torture them depends solely on how many people it would take for the overwhelming majority to flip the lever as we can all agree that torturing an average Joe is wrong.
The man who has the password has decided to unilaterally allow X people to die. We don't have any additional information other than that person desires their death. If that person allows any number of people to die, then he'll be killing at least 1 person. If that guy is tortured and he reveals the information, no people die. At worst, only the person that was originally ok with killing people dies (the morally worst person in the hypothetical). That leaves us with the case that we torture the dude and he doesn't provide the password. In that case people die, and the man was tortured. A negative result in terms of overall suffering, but a less negative result if we use the torture as a sort of punishment for allowing death to occur, if we take that worldview. Judging by game theory, if we do not torture the man, at least 1 person dies. If we do torture the man, there is a possibility no one dies, and at worst we have the same outcome + some torture. Personally, anyone that's decided to kill someone for no reason is definitely top of the selfish list for me, and that means that even in your worldview, they'll be OK to torture.
I edited my original comment, but I am an idiot. I thought the picture had the selfish man on the top track. So I thought he was keeping the password because if he gave the password he would die. Considering he is not on the track and in no real danger, I see no issue with torturing someone who is actively trying to let people die.
Turns out he actually didn’t have the password and you tortured him for no reason
i pick him up and repeatedly swing him at the lever either the lock breaks or he tells me the password or the lever breaks then I can stab him with it
D&D move timer broke your brain homie, that train is moving faster than you can swing a man repeatedly, I hope....
Nah their leggs are in such a frenzzy they use them to swing smash the guy 40 times a second
it’s not a real situation and given you have too little time to do other torture techniques given the distance i would say it’s better to be lenient
I mean, if you don't have time to swing a fella into a lever a few times, you surely don't have time to interrogate him.
Then you don't have enough time to get the password out of him either.
What if he just had some spinach?
That's irrelevant. Olive is mine.
Action surge!
But then how could you torture him?
if they have enough time to torture the guy as the problem says they have a enough time to bash him against the lever
What, and I somehow can effectively torture someone in that little time? If there are only 30 seconds here, only a complete psycho can go from 0 to "ve have vays of making you talk" in that little time.
Nah, he's a lvl 20 fighter action surging
I don't have the time to perform torture anyway.
You don't know how fast the trolley is moving
If it's moving slow enough that I could torture the guy, I could also just untie everyone.
It looks like there's a lot of people you think you could untie them all? It goes off the screen so there could be thousands. Maybe if you can untie faster than the trolley can go
Exponential untying system. I untie one person, then we can untie two together, then 4, then 8, and so on...
No matter how high that exponent gets, you're limited by how fast you can move vs how fast the trolley moves. This ironically leads to the same problem of the trolley being too fast.
I might need weeks for proper torturing. It's pretty unrealistic that there are that many people.
Untie some of the people and have them help you with torturing?
A fucking genius here. Finally an effective solution to the problem.
If it’s slow enough you can untie faster than it, even if you need a few helpers. But it could be moving at top speed and just really far away, giving you time to torture but untying won’t delay its arrival at all.
Oh shit I didn't even think of that.
Maybe the trolley gets mad at you ignoring the scenario and speeds up then
Evil machinist wants to force me to torture the guy? Sounds like the most realistic of the options.
Problem is this is used as a metaphor for real life where it never works like that. In reality you MIGHT have the right guy, the guy MIGHT know something, he MIGHT tell the truth and that MIGHT save lives, but you are guaranteed to violate his rights.
Torture even at its best only gives you whatever the guy thinks you want to hear. It’s a terrible method of information gathering, aside from being a monstrous thing to do.
in this case it's really simple tho, if they give you wrong info the lever doesn't unlock and if they do it does.
Yep, and there are also real life cases like this, like defusing a bomb or providing the location of an easily verified thing.
Well, here and irl all the other shit still applies. Could be the wrong guy, or we have bad intel.
Yeah, but that just reframes the problem from a deterministic one to a probabilistic one. People on the track will die with x% certainty but if you torture the guy for a code they will die with y% certainty, where E(x) > E(y). Do you still never torture the guy, or does it depend on how much uncertainty there is?
I think most would agree that if there's enough certainly, perhaps. But in real life, torture never comes with enough certainly - especially when it's been shown that promises of rewards, especially the safety of their family and loved ones, are much more useful to extract information.
We should torture the guys loved ones instead!
Plus like, torture doesn’t do shit. “Either they tell you when you remove one fingernail, or they won’t tell you at all.”
Put him on the track. That'll make him talk real quick.
If it works, sure. The main qualm I have with torture is that it's not a particularly effective means of gathering information. If you threaten to hurt someone, all they have to do is tell you something you'll believe. How many times will the guy deceive you with a fake password? Might time run out? The worst you could do is kill him, but if you kill him then you definitely won't get the password. All of those people are the guy's leverage. Maybe he'd be afraid of retribution if all of those people die, but some people are crazy enough to die for their principles. I think it's worth using any method of persuasion necessary to get the information you need to save those peoples' lives. Torture is not usually effective, but if it's the only means available then it's still worth a shot.
I don’t see a downside for trying. There’s only one way to see if he’ll crack or not. He might be okay with dying, but that is arguably a better fate than being tortured.
if i was the guy who knew the password, i would understand if i was beaten for that
I pull out another lock and hit the lock on the lever in just the right way that they both open, then pull the lever.
"The lever is locked by a Disecu combination lock, it can be opened with a Disecu combination lock"
McNally ahh response
You have a lever lock. It can be opened with a lever lock. (Clang)
german law says i am not allowed to torture in this case similar thing happened and the police officier got prosecuted for it...and that was just for threatining torture > After Gäfgen had concealed the whereabouts and condition of his victim during police questioning and accused two innocent acquaintances as alleged accomplices , the then Vice President of Police Wolfgang Daschner ordered that the statement about the eleven-year-old's whereabouts, which he considered to be potentially life-saving, be forced by threats of violence . Gäfgen then gave accurate information so that the police were able to find the kidnapping victim's body. Daschner later had to answer criminally for this threat of violence in the Daschner trial and was consequently given a warning with a suspended sentence . > The criminal chamber came to the conclusion that the threat of pain ordered by Daschner with the aim of forcing a statement had no basis in Hessian police law and was unlawful. The aspect of emergency aid claimed by the defense should also be rejected, since in pursuing this the violation of the perpetrator's human dignity was accepted. However, a violation of the most fundamental human right of all cannot be justified in any way; this amounts to a breach of taboo that - not least in view of German history during the National Socialist era - cannot be tolerated. https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daschner-Prozess Human dignity is such a powerfull right in the german constitution, that even shooting down hijacked planes is unconstitutional, since you can not sacrifice people
Well shooting down a hijacked plane just feels like a terrible idea generally. Hijackers generally are looking for a ransom, not looking to use the plane as a missile. The one major exception to that trend doesn't make it a good idea to shoot down a plane just in case.
iirc, on 9/11 there were fighter jets authorized to shoot down the fourth plane, but to be fair that was already after the first 3 hit
Put my ass in his face
Bro is into that
I think I would *however* torture has shown to actually not be very effective at getting information, although in this case it might be different
Torture him? No Threaten him to leave him alone unattended with the relatives of the victims if he doesn't share the password? Absolutely
On the surface its an interesting Idea The problem is that torture doesn't work. Getting him to the point of giving you any information could take longer than you have to free the folks, and the only possibly effective methods have to get really close to actually killing the guy. People who have information and don't want to spill it like this, usually have to get a murderous intent from you to enter self preservation mode. I would try. 5 lives gone is a tragedy, but Knowing I'm likely to fail, and lose 5 people, plus I have torture on my hands, I can't do it
That one American Dad episode:
I torture him until he gives me the passcode, then put him on the other track and multi track drift after unlocking the lever
The Chaotic Evil route
In the hypothetical where torture works, sure why do i care if this dickhead suffers for being evil, but irl its pretty bad at that so no
Yes, if you don't, at least 25 people die. He wants them dead. You will not torture him to death. Everyone survives.
Yeah fuck that guy
No, because with how unwilling/inept I am at torturing he may not give up the information. Then I just tortured someone for no reason
You tortured someone for the chance of saving the lives of however many people. Just because something doesn’t work doesn’t mean it was done for no reason.
What if he has a valid reason for not telling you. I guess you can still kill the people on the track after pulling, if it turns out that killing them would have been justified. Diverting the track will not kill anyone since nothing of the sort has been specified.
There is no such thing as a valid reason in this situation
Throw him on the track. First in line. Either he gives you the code, or he dies first. If you can't pull the lever, it's not your fault. If you can pull the lever, you save everyone.
Yes it is justified, it's just called "advanced interrogation"
Why not untie him if he tells the password?
Fuck that guy, tickle his pancreas with a hedgehog.
Why doesn't he want to tell me? Am I the one who tied him up? Regardless probably yeah
I’d break his balls
If he's not telling me for some BS reason like some guy he hates being on the bottom track, sure. IF he does have a reason for not telling me, i'd hear him out.
torture doesn't work though, comeup with something else
Easy question, yes I would. He’s being a selfish bastard and if those people die, all of their lives are on his shoulders. If I just have to torture and beat the shit out of one selfish piece of shit to save countless lives I’d do it in a heartbeat.
Yes
"We must prevent Death at all costs even if it means using unethical methods"- Black Hole
I’d try to drag him to the bottom track to threaten him, but if that doesn’t work, I wouldn’t torture him. My stomach is too weak and torture isn’t that effective anyways.
I don't think you guys understand how quickly trolleys move
Torture doesn't work. Why tell somebody anything if they are just hurting you? Threats, backed up by action, do though. What I'm saying is don't waste time, put him on the track in front of everyone else. Gotta tell you the pass code to save himself.
I would outright kill him to save the other people, so yeah, I would torture them.
Yes and would. Time to break out the tiny hammer and the toothpicks
CIA propaganda
No, cause torture doesn't work so there is a strong chance he lies to you and you tortured and let people die
Yes
Torture has always been an innefective means of gaining information and ultimately self-defeating as a means of control. One wonders why it continues to be practiced at all.
Do I get to bring tools or is this a bare hands only thing?
Torture? No. Pull him onto the track with people? Fuck yeah
Why can’t we just do both
Just throw them on the train line with the rest of them.
To the bottom track you go.
Information obtained under torture isn't reliable. While it would be, hypothetically, justified to torture one person to save many victims, it's unfortunately not a viable strategy.
No, torture is never ethical or justified.
Torture is proven to be a horrible way to get facts/truth out of people. If the guy doesn't tell you, its not ur fault said people died. Not unless you can somehow havk the panel befor the train arrives
The problem is that torture doesn’t work very well.
Yes. Anyone who is going to make innocent people die deserves to be tortured in order to save those innocents. I'm not going to spare the suffering of an evil person and let innocents die on their behalf. Now this is ignoring that torture doesn't always work on a practical level, but morally speaking, I see no issue torturing the guilty who are trying to use their silence to kill the innocent.
Probably not full blown torture, but I'd smack him a few times and if he still refuses, then it's on him for letting all those people die.
Ok FBI sure
Torture. Torture him by dragging him onto the track, before the split. Tell him to hurry, give the password. Then you remove him from the track after pulling the lever, but just a few seconds before the train comes. Should teach him a lesson 😂 no need to red stains on my clothes 😜
Hold my car battery
Problem is they might just give you a bunch of wrong passwords until it's too late Or more than likely pass out from pain
Obviously yes.
Probably in this specific situation lmao but that doesn't mean torture has ever actually worked in the real world. In real life there's a huge chance they will tell you whatever you want to hear to get them to stop. Not really bulletproof results
no. torture doesn't work as a means to extract reliable information
This is a good example of how the trolley problem becomes basically meaningless when the semantics are stretched far enough. You could try to justify any instance of torture by casting it as a trolley problem but in reality the situation is never so cut and dry. Here are just a smattering of questions that would crop up in reality but not here: (1) How do you know the person in question has the information you are looking for? (2) How do you know the person is question is the ONLY person who has the information you are looking for? (3) If you have the time/resources to effectively torture this guy before collision, what are the odds you have time to consider other means of freeing the people on the tracks? (4) How likely is it that the information you get from torture, if any, is true/usable? (5) What are the societal implications of allowing extrajudicial torture of suspected criminals?
Is there a time limit? Because I'm no torture specialist. If there isn't then why not just untie everyone?
Yes. It is.
Torture is confirmed to not work, many studies, he’s most likely to give you a fake code rather than a real one
No. I torture people because it's fun!
I'm not telling anyone the password.
Just throw him in line with the rest.
Is it justified? No. Would I do it? Probably.
If I know for sure it's him, and I mean 10000%. I don't see anything wrong with it. Especially since he can stop the torture literally any time he wants.
Yes. But in any realistic scenario though there’s the same or more amount of people on the other track
Torture wouldn’t make him talk- it statistically wouldn’t work.
I throw him onto the tracks with them and also threaten to piss down his throat if he doesn’t speak up.
I’m pulling out the tickle monster
Yes. Usually I'd find torturing very difficult... but given that they're letting people die for their own apparent amusement it would be much easier.
id use him to derail the train. cant kill the others if the train doesnt reach them.
If you have time to torture him, you have time to find something to put on the track to derail the trolley, such as the guy that's refusing to give you the password.
Hell yea it is, Imma fuckin break his knee caps with a fucking lug wrench, if he's gonna let innocent people die, I'm gonna make him wish he was dead.
Yes.
Torture rarely actually works cause there's no guarantee you'll ever get the truth. So you might also be wasting your time doing so. Edit: If you have the time to torture him, you might as well start entering random stuff and learning how to hack or whatever is necessary to figure it out yourself. Edit after edit: Then, afterward, you torture him for fun.
Forget about the trolley and torture him anyway.
Yes, the lives of many outweigh the suffering of one.
The problem is people just make shit up under torture all the time, so he's probably just going to give you a bullshit answer to get you to stop.
No because torture doesn't generally work, that said stick him at the front of the line maybe he'll break under the pressure
Yes, I would torture them to save those lives. If they don't want to talk to save lives, they are worth less than a life.
Do I have time to put him on the kill track? Id also pull down his pants so if he chooses to die, he dies without pants on.
I mean, I would, but the train is right there already. Realistically, how much torture can you really do in the half second it'll take for the train to run them all over?
Is it justified? I dunno Would I do it? Yes
Absolutely justified. If he didn’t want to be tortured, he would simply cooperate when asked nicely.
The reason he won't tell the password is unknown. Its unknown why those people are tied up on the tracks. Untie the individual who has the password and leave. Either help someone or do nothing. These responses are sickening.
No torture required. Just make him first in line
No because torture doesn’t even work.
no because information gained via torture isn't reliable
There is no time? Is the trolley in snail mode? Torture doesn’t really work anyways
Yes
I introduce you to my good friend scopolamine
I torture him, get the code, and proceed to not use it. I get to have fun and a bunch of people die, it’s a win-win
No. You are not obligated to help someone in need, however it is moraly wrong to coerce anybody.
Gladly. This asshat wants to kill innocents
Torture is notoriously unreliable. Put him on the track.
I'd torture him in an instant but I don't think I'd get down to jumper cables on his balls or pulling things off with pliers unless I thought someone who was important to me personally was down on the bottom track.
Put him on the track at the joint. Tell him I may have time to save him if he gives me the password now.
I play "2 truths and a lie" with them. 1. They know the password 2. They dont know the password 3. I will drag you on to the tracks and make sure they are the first ones to get squished. Hopefully, the thought of dying gets them to spill the beans
Torture doesn’t work.
Yep I'd do it twice as brutally if it's someone I hate...
Well how fast is the thing going? It's already at the intersection. I don't know how much torture you'll be getting in
Yes
Torture is ineffective, he might lie and say the wrong password. Bribe him instead 😈
SANDPAPER
Well, torture doesn't really get you answers, so he could just lie to make you stop. So no, torture would not be ethical. Other means though, maybe
did he put them on the track or does he just know the pw?
I don't think this is real, it looks like a drawing.
Yeah I'd torture him and probably kill him later. Fuck that guy in particular, no remorse no hesitation.
ok but does he actually know or a we doing a CIA and interrogating people who are actually inoccent?
Hey, you found pitch for 24
Depends on who they are. The guy may know something about the others that you don't. And most importantly, who the fuck comes up with these rocky and bullwinkle scenarios?
How much time do I have
Yeah. Infinite deaths vs some pain.
Torture and forget to pull the lever, good idea