This example situation reminds me of the thought experiment proposed by Phillipa Foot in 1967. Famously known as the Trolley Problem, the experiment has spawned various variations, one of which is a situation very similar to the above example. If 5 people could be saved by one healthy person’s organs, would you, as a doctor operating on them, kill the one healthy person to save the lives of the others. There are many variables that are then added to this to make this version more and more complicated as well. For my fellow TV show fans, there is a scene in the show “The Good Place” ( Season 2 Episode 6) that goes through this thought experiment in further detail with a few different variations.
The one thought that often comes to my mind about this problem is that if our worth as humans is determined by our relationships we have with people or if it is just by our mere existence.
These are certainly mind-bending hypothetical situations/problems/puzzles. However, as far-fetched as they may seem, the fact is that similarly difficult ethical situations actually do occur in life now and then. Often these situations arise and there is little or no time to try to solve the puzzle, rather there is only time to react. Years ago, there was a situation in Washington D.C. during a frigid time of winter when an airplane crashed into an ice-covered river. At least one heroic soul jumped into the icy water without hesitation and saved lives. Perhaps we can rehearse in our minds what we might do in such a situation, but we really might not know what we will do impulsively until the moment of decision arrives.
ReplyDeleteThese dilemmas are certainly deserving of the time and arguments afforded them, but I'll admit I've always found Kant's Kingdom of Ends an appealing means to choose. While his separation of rational and emotional spheres is problematic, the idea that humans are ENDS, never to be considered MEANS is attractive. The alternative, the Machiavellian tendencies, have terrifying implications of the utility of human life, a teleological concept I'm not comfortable supporting in any way.
ReplyDeleteIn short, the idea of "accidentally" allowing a single person to die to save the life of five, ten, a hundred more, without their willingness, is reprehensible.
Trolley-type problems are fun (if that's the right word), to a point, but in an actual life-or-death situation I imagine many of us would find ourselves overcome by an arresting or even stultifying feeling of "why me?" Rehearsing improbable scenarios might help, but I'm with Matthew: if we agree with Kant that no one should ever be treated as a mere means, we'll not take such thought experiments seriously enough to consider the sacrifice of a fellow human - for any ulterior good.
ReplyDelete