Why Is The Trolley Experiment Wrong

In this reading by Gazzaniga: “Toward a Universal Ethics”, we are presented with The Trolley Dilemma. The dilemma in abstract moral reasoning studies most often presented by researchers is the trolley problem. This is an experiment in ethics and moral justice. A situation built on abstract moral reasoning. The question here is “Are morals something that is innate or are they something we learn?”

2. Assess the morality of what the curious applicants did from the point of view of egoism, utilitarianism, Kant’ ethics, Ross’ pluralism, and rule utilitarianism.

David Figueroa Eng. 101A Professor Stern 4/20/15 Final draft In conclusion, in discussions of torture, one controversial issue has been on the use of it. On one hand, the people against torture argue that it is cruel and unusual punishment. On the other hand, those for torture argue that it should be used for the greater good. Others even maintain that under extreme circumstances, it may be admissible if it can save American lives. My own view is that no one should be subjected to cruel punishment because it is not only illegal, unreliable, ineffective, time consuming, it also has too many flaws that could potentially ruin innocent lives. The definition of torture is any act, whether physical or emotional, or maybe both, is intentionally subjected to a specific individual or a group for many reasons. Most of these reasons that torture is administered is for extracting information from an individual or just for punishing him/her for a crime that he/she has committed or is suspected of committing. The use of torture can be used to intimidate a person to give information that may be beneficial for a nation. The use of torture has been used for many centuries. The purposes of using torture have changed over the years as well as the methods in which a person is tortured. One crucial piece that has been established that separates us human beings from barbarians is the prohibition of using torture. There are many reasons why torture has been deemed a crime now in society. There are

In this paper, I will explicate how a Utilitarian and a Kantian would understand the Trolley Problem and describe why I consider the Utilitarian approach to fare better in the case of the Trolley Problem. On one hand, a Utilitarian, a believer in the philosophy of Utilitarianism, believes that a morally admirable action is one that helps the maximum number of people. A Kantian, on the other hand, is a believer and follower of the Kantian ethics, which fundamentally preach that the correctness or wrongness of one’s actions depends on if one carries out one’s duty, and not on the consequences of one’s actions. In order to further understand the perspectives of these two philosophies, I will explain how they would comprehend the Trolley Problem, which is, essentially, a theoretical moral predicament where a trolley is speeding down a railway track and five people are tied to the track and a bystander has two options: either pull a lever, divert the train to an alternate railway track with one person on it and kill that one person and save five people, and thus intentionally commit homicide, or the bystander doesn’t pull the lever and lets five people die, therefore submissively allowing five deaths.

As a future teacher, it will be part of my job to increase my students’ moral reasoning. Moral reasoning deals with how individuals think about moral issues. Lawrence Kohlberg developed stages of moral reasoning which researchers use to assess an individual. According to Steinberg (2014), the adults in an adolescent’s life can impact their moral development. Therefore, as their teacher, I will conduct activities in my classroom, such as Collaborative Reasoning, Think-Pair-Share, a line activity, and an online discussion board, which will foster my students’ moral development. In addition, I will monitor my students’ growth by conducting a pre-assessment as well as a final assessment. Through my classroom activities, I expect my students to

Interrogational torture is one of the many tough ethical questions that people debate about in the United States. Is it right or is it wrong? Many believe that the United States does not practice intense interrogational acts such as torture. Many people have fought to abolish any form of torture while many fight to keep some forms of it to help keep the peace. Whether you believe in it or not, torture is and will always be an ethical dilemma that comes up.

The complexity of the Trolley problem is one that can be resolved by unravelling the concept itself and considering the multipe possible analogies, the use of which is very important in the understanding and answering of ethical questions such as the Trolley problem . The trolley problem mainly deals with the law in relation in to morality, how public policy dictates or influences legality. Finding the most ethical solution to the problem is what is required of those who dare undertaking solving this problem

This scenario is the most popularly used variation. Comparatively, the “footswitch” variation of the problem forces test subjects to choose between allowing a train to hit five people or pushing an uninvolved man onto the tracks to slow the train. A utilitarian would sacrifice one to save the five in both scenarios. Those who display utilitarian thought in the Trolley Thought Experiment tend to have decreased sense of responsibility, higher than average levels of testosterone, increased levels of anger, and low levels of serotonin (Duke). Surprisingly, it is most common in individuals with high cognitive ability and also prevalent in those suffering cognitive impairment from inebriation

Every day we are faced with certain situations that challenge us with how to act in an ethical manner. It can be human nature to feel unsure or conflicted with the correct moral choice. Some can say that one should know how to handle such dilemmas and others may say that there should be a reference of some sort to help guide through such conflicts. Sometimes we know the answers and sometimes we are unsure of how to handle certain situations. Most times we go through life wondering what we should do. As I become further educated on the different theories of ethics, I believe there are answers that are available in guiding one through an ethical dilemma and or judgment. I will discuss Vincent Ruggiero’s three basic criteria, Robert Kegan’s order of consciousness, the three schools of ethics and the correlation between all three.

Within this framework, actions that are likely to maximize good effects, or minimize the occurrence of bad effects, are those kinds of actions one is permitted, or obligated (highlighted for emphasis) to perform (though in this framework ‘good’ and ‘bad’ do not necessarily have to be defined strictly in terms of ‘welfare’ and ‘suffering’) (p. 639).

(6)You should not kill an innocent (friendless but healthy) person EVEN IF by doing so (and giving his organs to several others) you could increase net happiness.

My moral character was being tested and because it could have a negative effect on other people’s lives, I wrestled with my own beliefs. I needed a

Part 4 No human being wants to see other human being go through pain or suffer. It is good to have pity on individual that is suffering without the hope to survive and allow them to die peacefully with dignity. Most of the people that has pains and terminal illness seek mercy killing, in this situation, no one can avoid death and their suffering is in vein. The question in this ethical problem is that: is relieving suffering the reason we kill or is it unethical or immoral to kill? Whether it is ok to kill is the most central to this ethical issue. Fundamentally killing another human being is not ok, but unlike most ethical and moral theories, life has exception. Some individuals do not think twice at the thought of killing others, but what

1 Explain the Trolley Driver, Bystander at the Switch, Fat Man, Transplant, & Hospital scenarios discussed in the "The Trolley Problem" reading. In doing so, address what the ethical issue(s) are in each of these scenarios.

I am going to answer these two questions in this essay. They are “Do you think that the right to life entails a right to die under certain circumstances?” and “Should the laws be changed to grant a universal right to voluntary euthanasia?”. In this essay, I am going to give reasons using ethical theories to justify these questions.