The Differences and Similarities of Different Philosophers on Tackling the Trolley Dilemma

DOI

10.2991/assehr.k.220110.138How to use a DOI?

Keywords

Trolley Dilemma; The Trolley Problem; Judith Jarvis Thomson; Joshua D. Greene; Peter Singer; Frances M. Kamm

Abstract

The Trolley Dilemma, since originally brought up by Philippa Foot in 1967, has caused a series of debates among philosophers and scholars from various schools of thought. Though the academic field has yet to step foot on a common ground, The Trolley Dilemma has consistently induced many discussions when taking context of factors in the developing world into consideration, resulting in numerous variations of the original dilemma, such as Transplant, Bystander, and Fatman. Despite their distinct forms, they all share the same struggle for the decision makers – the trolley driver, the bystander, or other roles: whether to let five people die or sacrifice one equally innocent person to save the five. In this paper, our philosophers’ (Judith Jarvis Thomson, Joshua D. Greene, Peter Singer, Frances M. Kamm) view on the Trolley Dilemma is being critically analyzed, compared and contrasted, and ends upon the suggestion of potentially “walking away” as a form of nonaction which eradicates the ought. Through comparing the similarities and differences, strengths and drawbacks among theories proposed by great minds, I plan to state that there will never be an unanimously agreed upon solution to this dilemma. I regard the papers being in a “debate” because there will only be variants after variants created by future philosophers in order to refute the past essays, leading to nowhere apart from suffocating humanity and themselves within it. Nonetheless, although the dilemma may never be solved, from the unstopping debates, implied ideas may be exerted, leading to advancements on the field of morality. Comparatively, I will contribute to academia by interpreting significant thoughts thoroughly, and through comparing and contrasting from a neutral standpoint, I will bring in new perspectives to approach them. I believe that my paper will give rise to more critical thoughts on this never-ending and controversial philosophical subject and invite more who are interested to participate in this debate.

Copyright

© 2022 The Authors. Published by Atlantis Press SARL.

Open Access

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license.

Download article (PDF)

TY  - CONF
AU  - FengYu Yang
PY  - 2022
DA  - 2022/01/28
TI  - The Differences and Similarities of Different Philosophers on Tackling the Trolley Dilemma
BT  - Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Public Art and Human Development ( ICPAHD 2021)
PB  - Atlantis Press
SP  - 722
EP  - 726
SN  - 2352-5398
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220110.138
DO  - 10.2991/assehr.k.220110.138
ID  - Yang2022
ER  -