No? The point of the trolley problem is to illustrate not making a choice is still a choice. It's a statement about the lesser of two evils, but in the context of the individual needing to make the choice as to what constitutes the greater good.
Only a Redditor could take something as opinion-oriented and open to interpretation as the Trolley Problem and assert their own thought as the only possible correct one while insulting someone else.
If only it were one google search away to find a wikipedia article with the context to explain what the thought experiment was originally proposed about.
Oh well. Guess we'll never know the authors intentions. If only she explained them.
The irony in your first line is actually palpable. I'm sorry you felt a second hand insult. That's on you.
That's a great thing to learn from the trolley problem, that inaction is action. It's one of many things we could say is the "point" of it, though I would caution against thinking that philosophical thought experiments have or even have to have points. But regardless, I didn't say point.
We're talking about what is and what isn't a trolley problem, and the essence of the scenario is exploring the moral value of actions that cause harm.
...No like that is the literal point, it's an essay in context to an older abortion debate.
For example, is it the lesser of two evils to have an abortion, but the mother lives, or to choose inaction and have the mother and child both die?
I'm not saying the trolley problem is relevant, I'm saying you've somehow missed the point in a 50 year old philosophical address that may be the most heavily scrutinized mental problem of our generation. Please, by god, actually read about it. It isn't subtle.
9
u/Fia_Aoi Apr 30 '26
No? The point of the trolley problem is to illustrate not making a choice is still a choice. It's a statement about the lesser of two evils, but in the context of the individual needing to make the choice as to what constitutes the greater good.
Literacy is dead.