A Trolley Incident Report

Orphan trains and Carlisle and the ways people from the past undermined the minorities and children of America. The film "The orphan Trains" tells us the story of children who were taken from the streets of New York City and put on trains to rural America. A traffic in immigrant children were developed and droves of them teamed the streets of New York (A People's History of the United States 1492-present, 260). The streets of NYC were dirty, overcrowded, and dangerous. Just as street gangs had female auxiliaries, they also had farm leagues for children (These are the Good Old Days, 19). During the time of the late 1800's and early 1900's many people were trying to help children. Progressive reformers, often called

“Afterward I rented a car and drove out to the mansion to forage for the Stone. Unfortunately, the construction workers had already gotten a glimpse of the secret room.”

When we first drove into the La Comedia parking lot, we were politely greeted by a staff member who was in charge of helping our

After visiting two landlords, on Friday the 22 we were finally getting to see the Castillo apartments. Having looked at the apartments online my friends and I really wanted to go and see them in person. On the way to the appointment, Megan and I talked about the places we were going to see and which things we liked more about

The trolley problem is a hypothetical scenario created by philosopher Phillipa Foot in 1967 to challenge ones moral beliefs on what action they would take in two difficult scenarios. There are many adaptions to the original scenarios, however for the purpose of this essay the two scenarios can be described as follows.

The Trolley Driver, Transplant and Bystander at the Switch are different situations to approach and analyze questions of morality. Firstly, what is the difference between letting something happen and directly affecting an outcome? And what does morality require or forbid in each situation? To answer these questions, I will be using Jeremy Bentham’s approach of utilitarianism.

Judith Jarvis Thomson presents an ethical dilemma entitled The Trolley Problem in The Monist. The problem describes a situation in which a trolley car is moving quickly and out of control on a train track towards five people who are tied to the tracks; you have the power to pull a lever, change the direction of the trolley car and save those five people – at the expense of the life of one person who is on the track the car was diverted to (Thomson 1397). The choice to be made is not just about whether or not one should pull the lever though. The problem dictates a choice about whether one would kill, in the case of choosing to pull the lever to kill the one person and save the five, or letting die, in which case nothing is done and the five are killed because of the lack of action taken (Thomson 1398). Thomson believes it would be incorrect to turn the trolley and willingly choose to kill one person, rather than allow the five to die, but the philosophies of Immanuel Kant and John Stewart Mill must be analyzed to determine whether they would agree with Thomson, or have a different view from Thomson as well as one another. When considering J.J. Thomson’s Trolley Problem, the philosophies of Kant and Mill must be fully analyzed and expressed to determine the most plausible perspective to be taken by both philosophers on the issue. There are strengths, weaknesses and criticisms of both ethical arguments, and these will be considered as well in the analysis.

The Trolley problems are unique in that the two cases are two morally different ways of presenting the same dilemma. The key difference between the switch case and the platform case is the directness of the consequences of one’s actions. I will argue using Kant’s deontological ethical theory why one should pull the lever but not push the backpacker because of the different affects on morality that arises with the change in role you play in each scenario.

Sandel opened his discussion with the audience through four stories followed by audience responses to, What's the right thing to do?" Story one was about five workers on a trolley which does not have working breaks. If the trolley crash, all five passengers will die. However, there is a worker working on the track. The moral dilemma is, do they allow the trolley to keep straight and crash killing all five passengers, or do they use the steering wheel to turn, resulting in the death of the worker that is working on the track?

Walking under the canopy of trees was like a breath of fresh air from the harsh reality of the world. The sun’s rays try and try to push through the thicket of trees. Yet the trail stays barely light enough to see.

If I were the magistrate I would not have done anything differently. I agree that the magistrate did not have any other option. Why would you risk the life of an entire community for one person? Even though the man was innocent, the news shows what rioters are capable of, very chaotic, and will not stop at nothing until they get the demands they are seeking. Therefore, I would sacrifice the life of one innocent disliked man to save an entire community and maybe the life of police officers as well.

The trolley problem is a hypothetical experiment in philosophy that involves an emergency rescue where an uncontrolled trolley travels down a track towards a group of five workers. A bystander happens to be standing next to a switch that can choose to flip the switch and divert the trolley and save the five, however, diverting the track towards a line which has only one worker on it. This problem poses a question on the rights of people sacrificing themselves or others for a better outcome. In this essay, I agree that it is permissible for the bystander to intervene and divert the track in order to save the five workers, resulting in the death of one. From an entirely utilitarian viewpoint, it is important to provide the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people (Smart 1973). However, it is important not to infringe upon the rights of others directly.

The introduction of the trolley car (or cable car) at the turn of the century to cities revolutionized urban form. While railroads had already existed for some time, they were still primarily used for commerce, industry, and long distance travel. The trolley car however, directly impacted local urban dwellers and workers. Surprisingly, the first electric streetcar was not in New York City, nor in Chicago, but rather it was first used in Richmond, Virginia in 1880 (Brooklyn Historic Railway Association). The streetcar then became the most efficient and popular mode of transportation in cities for the next 50 years. It was in this era, that the foundation was laid for suburbanization and the rise of the automobile in the earl 1920´s. Workers

On Sunday, July 19th at approximately 10:04 AM, I accidently damaged the back window of the I.T electric truck.

Trolley problem or dilemma is a concept that chokes the mind to give a solution amidst a problem. It allows us to consider an outcome of an action through our deeds, which are ethically questionable. The basic analogy of the trolley problem was developed by Phillipa Foot in 1967. It presumes that if there is a train that is traveling along a rail, and in front of the rail are five people tied. Another diversion of the rail has only one person tied. As you are standing, the train can only take the two rails, ultimately killing either the five people or the one tied up person. Fortunately, you are in a position to shift the rail in either of the directions. The problem now emanates from the ethical question: