Solving the Trolley Driver and the Transplant Cases

In case of "cart driver" it is very similar to "transplant" case. If you choose to intervene, only one person dies, and if you do not intervene five people will die. Therefore, in either case, you can choose to save 5 lives at one person's expense. These two cases are also trying to explore the concept of "moral licensing". The two cases are structurally similar, but the background of the case is very different. In the case of a trolley driver, it morally aimed a cart to a person, was allowed to kill him and save five people.

Consider, for example, the general thought experiment proposed by a moral philosopher, "Trolleybus". Let's say you are a runaway trolleybus driver and approaching the five people working on the track. As you accelerate towards this tragedy, you will be able to transfer the train to the side rails and you will notice that you kill only one person working on the other track. What are you doing? Let's consider another situation. Let's say you are standing on a cliff to see the train concern for five people on the danger of endanglement, not the conductor of the train. Next to you there is a fat person whose huge size can stop an oncoming car. You should give him a push so that he will land on the track and be killed on the train - but in the process will you save five more lives?

The simplest form was created by British philosopher Philippa Foot in 1967. The problem with this car imagines a driver driving a runaway streetcar on a truck. Five men are working on this truck, and they definitely die when the trolley arrives. Fortunately, the driver can switch the car's path to another track and save all five. Unfortunately, one is studying this branch and it will be killed when it changes. With this original version, it is not difficult to say what to do. The driver should rescue five lives. If we exchange the driver with a computer program and create a fully automated cart we will instruct it to choose a smaller evil: kill less people in any similar situation . In fact, we may actively choose a program to make such a decision, because it always follows this logic, and humans may panic or react.

When is it ethical to hand over our decision to the machine? When will excessive automation over come?

The trolley problem helped us understand how we make decisions, but nobody talked about trolley drivers. The driver of the trolley bus must bear the consequences of his actions. As a rule, we are all car drivers. However, in this thought experiment, we do not experiment anymore by just looking at some actions. But what if you do this? The basic reason for this situation is that the driver of the car is forced to make a decision. The result of this decision is the death of one or more people. This is not the driver's fault. He or she must make a choice. But the real problem is that drivers feel guilty because of the circumstances they are experiencing. The person who was killed by an uncontrollable car is dead. The driver of the car destroyed the life, but the driver of the car must endure guilt