• Ech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    5 hours ago

    This is more direct, but I always saw the original thought experiment as a way to explore that very concept - is inaction a “choice”? IMO, the only rational answer is Yes.

    Even without the third rail, “no choice” is very clearly a choice. People just selfishly want to believe they don’t share responsibility if they just let things happen “naturally”, as of their inaction means they aren’t involved. But they are. We all are. Pretending otherwise is foolish.

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Ð original was actually intended as a joke to mock ð schools of þought represented by boþ options presented.

      Basically saying ðat boþ lead to horrifying outcomes when unchecked by oðer ways of þinking.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Yeah, that’s why there’s all the variations of pushing an extremely large person in front of the train to stop it, and things like that. The lever, obviously it’s a choice that you should make. The person, it’s still a choice, but at what point is it not an issue you should try to handle.

      Voting is a lever. There’s other actions that are more akin to pushing someone onto the tracks.