Fun fact - the philosopher who came up with the trolley problem - Philippa Foot - was the granddaughter of US President Grover Cleveland.
8 Likes
Oh, yeah - he got it, for sure! 
I was in the minority re lobsters vs. cats, though.
4 Likes
What if, instead of a baby, it had been a foetus, though?
And what if it was a foetus and the five old people were certain Supreme Court judges?
Choices, choices.
7 Likes
I didn’t do anything for all of them.
93 dead!
3 Likes
I see a Kobayashi Maru.
6 Likes
I literally wrote an essay on the Trolley problem, the Kobayashi Maru, and our current political climate. Yeah me!
But there’s only one right answer to the trolley problem:
8 Likes
Still feel like the bad guy. 
1 Like
I killed 62, and it would have been 58 if I hadn’t clicked the wrong button once. My philosophy was to minimize negative impact (which wasn’t always the same as minimizing the number of people). When the expected value of the choices was equal (e.g., 50% it 2 people, 10% it’s 10), my default was to do nothing.
2 Likes
how would she answer the trolley problem? And what concrete ethical problem was the trolley problem supposed to resemble?
I got 51. Not sure how to interpret that. Sorry to all the people stuck in the infinite time loop.
My other old favorites:
3 Likes
1 Like
I trolleyed 54.
It’s pretty interesting seeing the percentages.
I thought it was strange how most people would pull the lever to smash just one other trolley rather than the 3 if you do nothing, but when it came to the issue of emissions, they’d smash the trolleys. Like, do people not know about emissions???
Also felt like a kind of weird proxy for how some people stand up for corporations. I was kind of like, “fuck it, they’re not my trolleys, I’m not going to risk being liable for any of this.”
2 Likes
I saved the Mona Lisa. Only 14% of you philistines were with me on this!
I killed 71 people. And I’d do it again!
6 Likes
My high score is: 102
(Beat that Michael!)
2 Likes
I think you are making an unwarranted assumption. It is not justified to think that all life is valuable to the person living it. The person in question may, for any number of reasons, be experiencing prolong misery as a condition of their existence. Or perhaps the lives are being shortened in ways that vastly enhance the enjoyment of said lives by the people living them. In fact, don’t we all exchange some life in later years for things ew enjoy doing that aren’t always good for us because we calculate that the pleasure experienced now is worth more to us than the presumed discomfort or misery experienced in old age as our bodies fail us progressively?
My reasoning on that one was: There is no one “original” Mona Lisa. He painted at least three at more or less the same time, so at worst we are losing just one of the extant originals.
2 Likes
Plus, I already bought the NFT, so, no biggie.
10 Likes
You can’t assume the trollies are the same kind as the CO2 emitting one. You can only assume what is in the problem. And since trollies are a public good in that they provide transportation, I figured losing one trolley was better than losing several.
1 Like
