What is the Trolley Dilemma?
The trolley dilemma presents a moral scenario where individuals must decide whether it is acceptable to sacrifice a few to save many. It typically involves a runaway trolley and forces people to confront difficult ethical decisions.
Two Variations of the Trolley Problem
1. The Track Switch Dilemma
In this scenario, a trolley with broken brakes is speeding down a track where five workers are standing. Unless something is done, all five will die. However, there is a lever that can divert the trolley onto another track where only one worker is present. Would you pull the lever to save five lives at the cost of one?
This version of the dilemma was introduced by British philosopher Philippa Foot. A survey showed that 89% of respondents agreed that they would change the trolley's direction, favoring the rational decision to minimize overall harm. In research conducted by psychologist Joshua Greene, brain activity showed that the prefrontal cortex, associated with logical decision-making, was activated in respondents.
2. The Fat Man Dilemma
In this variation, you are watching the trolley from a footbridge, and it is still heading toward five workers. The only way to stop the trolley is by dropping something heavy in its path. On the bridge with you is a large man. While you wouldn't be heavy enough to stop the trolley yourself, pushing the man off the bridge would halt the trolley and save the workers. Would you push him?
Judith Jarvis Thomson, an American moral philosopher, proposed this variation. Unlike the first scenario, 78% of respondents said they would not push the man. Joshua Greene's fMRI studies revealed that this time, emotional brain areas, such as the amygdala, were more active in participants' responses.
The Dilemma Within the Trolley Problem
Both versions of the trolley problem appear to ask the same core question: is it right to sacrifice a few to save many? Yet, respondents often provide different answers to the two scenarios.
Why does this happen?
Key Differences in Decision-Making
1. Focus on Harm: In the first scenario, the emphasis is on preventing the deaths of five people by redirecting harm to one. In contrast, the second scenario centers on actively causing harm to one person to save five.
2. Rights and Agency: In the track-switch dilemma, it seems as though the harm is redistributed naturally, while in the fat man scenario, it feels like the individual’s rights are being violated to save others. This difference in perception significantly affects people’s judgments.
Why the Trolley Dilemma Matters
The exact reasons for the emotional and rational divide in these scenarios remain unclear. However, the differences in brain activity suggest that ethical decisions may rely on whether the rational or emotional parts of the brain are more engaged during a dilemma. This indicates that people might base their choices not purely on moral reasoning but on the part of the brain that dominates the decision-making process in each situation.
0 Comments