Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

“A runaway trolley hurtles toward five unaware workmen; the only way to save them is to push a heavy man (standing nearby on a footbridge) onto the track where he will die in stopping the trolley.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080609115219.htm

Who Shalt Not Kill? Brain Power Leads To Level-Headedness When Faced With Moral Dilemmas

ScienceDaily (June 11, 2008) — Should a sergeant sacrifice a wounded private on the battlefield in order to save the rest of his troops? Is euthanasia acceptable if it prevents needless suffering? Many of us will have to face some sort of extreme moral choice such as these at least once in our life. And we are also surrounded by less dramatic moral choices everyday: Do I buy the hybrid? Do I vote for a particular presidential candidate? Unfortunately, very little is known beyond philosophical speculation about how people understand morality and make decisions on moral issues.

Past research suggests that moral dilemmas can evoke strong emotions in people and tend to override thoughtful deliberation and reasoning. However, more recent neuroimaging research has discovered that sometimes people are capable of voluntarily suppressing these emotional reactions, allowing for decisions based on reasoning and careful deliberation of the consequences of one’s actions.

A new study appearing in the June issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, appears to support this neuroimaging evidence. Adam Moore of Princeton University and his colleagues Brian Clark and Michael Kane of the University of North Carolina at Greensboro tested this notion by measuring individuals’ working memory capacity -- essentially their ability to mentally juggle multiple pieces of information. The idea was that people who could best juggle information would be able to control their emotion and engage in “deliberative processing.”

The researchers then asked participants to make decisions in emotionally provocative situations. One example:

“A runaway trolley hurtles toward five unaware workmen; the only way to save them is to push a heavy man (standing nearby on a footbridge) onto the track where he will die in stopping the trolley.”

In these emotion laden scenarios, people with high working memory capacity were not only more consistent in their judgments but their answers indicated that they were considering the consequences of their choices in a way that the other participants were not.

“This suggests that emotional reactions to moral issues can drive our judgments and motivate action but can also blind us to the consequences of our decisions in some cases,” write the authors. Ultimately, people with higher working memory can be relied upon to make more consistent decisions and are able to more deeply consider consequences in these highly charged instances.


***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Rue: 1 Keyboard: 0
*mopping up coffee*

Oh man, hehehe.

Seriously though, one of the great things about being an ITSP gearhead is that I could prolly figure a way to stop the damn thing without anyone having die, and quick enough to put it into action - who cares if you snap an axle or blow the gearing all to hell, it's just stuff, and people are more important than stuff, IMHO.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
For the proposed scenario, I've never understood why you can't convince someone to sacrifice their car and ditch at the last second. Or yourself, if you have a car.

If a trolley is even an issue, there are ROADS where you're at.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Careful - You're liable to get called a "commie". ;)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

“A runaway trolley hurtles toward five unaware workmen; the only way to save them is to push a heavy man (standing nearby on a footbridge) onto the track where he will die in stopping the trolley.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
But: The scenario makes for only one choice, that's the idea. So what would be your choice, and why?

You can't change the parameters by saying you'd sacrifice a car, the test is IF the only way were to... So we can't change the parameters.

Me, I'd scream at the workmen to move, but THAT's not allowed either, since it says "the only way..." It's a strange scenario, given the way it's visualized; if the only way is to push the guy off the bridge, then there's time to holler at them to scatter; a big man couldn't stop a trolley; there should be other options, etc. But that IS the scenario proposed. Hmmm...

(Thanx for the first giggle of my morning, Gino. Wasn't good enough to spill anything, but made me giggle)


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Maybe the five guys beat their wives...
Maybe it would be upsetting God's plan & cheating the Devil out of new human waste...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
I'd throw Rappy under a bus to save a hamster

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Heh, that is kinda funny... Hamsters.

But isn't saying that you'd throw AURaptor under a bus kind of a life assessment/judgment too?

---

Quote:

---

Do they have an agenda for encouraging one choice over another?

---

Quote:

---

There's always more than two options. Always. And neither option presented would allow the best case scenario or the most morally sound ethical action.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Heh, that is kinda funny... Hamsters.

But isn't saying that you'd throw AURaptor under a bus kind of a life assessment/judgment too?

You know what else bugs me here, is that they use a large guy, 250 lbs (which might not necessarily be fat, depending on muscle mass) and we are to ASSUME his life is not worth as much because... He's not healthy? He hasn't taken care of himself?

What about a thin muscular guy smoking a cigarette? What if it's a gay guy with AIDs? What about a homeless guy who's malnourished and therefore unhealthy? What about someone who's just plain poor, same reason? What if it's someone of colour who lives in a ghetto? What if it's someone of colour? As sensitivity decreases about needing to kill someone to make for a better outcome, can that be manipulated?

I mean, nothing ABOUT that question makes it better or more sensical, and the attempt to try to "lessen the blow" for the forced choice is MINDBOGGLING. Seriously, what ARE they trying to accomplish/encourage here?

---

Quote:

---

Is this some kind of hyper-suspicion, of anyone/anything in authority? It wouldn't be the first time people have used this kind of cynicism to duck a difficult question - some anti-war types come to mind.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Well, it's also leading, because who's going to say no?

---

Quote:

---

Try it this way, Byte:

A trolley is out of control, and it's going to kill or maim 5 people a short distance away who are unaware of impending doom, and you can't warn them in any way. Would you throw YOURSELF in front of the trolley to save these 5 peoples' lives?

Is that more acceptable?

---

Quote:

---

An awful lot of pro-war types use it to duck difficult questions, too.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kpo:

Quote:

---

Try it this way, Byte:

A trolley is out of control, and it's going to kill or maim 5 people a short distance away who are unaware of impending doom, and you can't warn them in any way. Would you throw YOURSELF in front of the trolley to save these 5 peoples' lives?

Is that more acceptable?

---

Yes, and so completely misses the point of the exercise...

Heads should roll

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kpo:

Quote:

---

An awful lot of pro-war types use it to duck difficult questions, too.

---

Cynicism? Of those in authority...?

You could say UN weapons inspectors I guess. Not sure if you meant that though, or if you got lucky.

Heads should roll

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:
All that's really being studied is how people take the study. You can't go from those results to "this is how people behave." Real Life has so many more different shades of possibilities.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

---