Comments on Amazing Posts: What's Right Isn't Always Popular

pull the chain

2010-08-18T00:02:04.861+05:30

pull the chain

the obvious argument for saving more children rath...

2009-09-04T21:25:38.163+05:30

the obvious argument for saving more children rather than less is, of course, 'but what if one of them had found a cure for cancer?' or something like that. but using this situation as more of an mathematical formula involving social issues instead of numbers, and becoming unbiased about whether or not you might hurt a child's feelings, it's obvious that the one kid on the unused tracks is much more likely to do anything worth mentioning in his life, as opposed to the fistful of assholes in harm's way.

I strongly disagree with the the title and quote u...

2009-08-22T00:40:18.866+05:30

I strongly disagree with the the title and quote used in this argument saying that one of the options in the situation is "right" (and therefore implying the other one is wrong or evil). This philosophical/moral test is completely subjective to each person; there is no right or wrong answer.
A utilitarian would say the greatest good would be saving the most lives. Another person would say if you divert the track then you are then directly responsible for the death of that one child.
While I do agree that the track should not be diverted, I do not necessarily agree that that decision is "right" and the other one "wrong". IT is a matter of personal opinion.

If you try to interfere and divert the train at th...

2009-08-01T05:41:43.543+05:30

If you try to interfere and divert the train at the last moment then all of the kids will die. The ones playing on the active line will hear the train coming and jump to what they believe is the safety of the unused track, right into the path of the train, which will then likely derail.

This is such a stupid question. Would you rather k...

2009-07-02T08:00:58.150+05:30

This is such a stupid question. Would you rather kill the life of an innocent person to donate all their organs to people dying? Would you say this is fair? Similarly, why divert the train tracks?? Duh.

Who cares? None of those retards should be playin...

2009-05-31T16:42:27.371+05:30

Who cares?

None of those retards should be playing on the train tracks in the first place.
Death by "Train squash" is great for the species. The best possible outcome is that the train squashes retards 1,2 and 3 on the fist track, and then jack knifes, clipping retard 4 in the genitals, destroying retard 4's ability to pass on it's genes. Even better if retard 4 lives to serve as a macabre warning to the offspring of the more intelligent as a walking statement "Dont play on fucking train tracks".
Their retard genes expunged from the gene pool will thusly be to the benefit of us all in the long run. Huray for evolution of the species.

"Remove all safety warnings. Let natural selection do the rest."

Komakino, you make me sick. Just because you're li...

2009-05-13T08:20:00.000+05:30

Komakino, you make me sick. Just because you're likely to be lonely and depressed, exhibiting all the things you mentioned, doesn't mean that the possibility of someone turning out like you leaves them without the right to live. There is no reason to choose him based solely on the assumption that he will turn out like that. What if someone had decided that about your stupid ass?

Why are the kids playing on the train tracks anywa...

2009-03-29T05:06:00.000+05:30

Why are the kids playing on the train tracks anyway? Their parents need to keep track of their kids.

What time did this train leave the station? And wh...

2009-03-26T00:41:00.000+05:30

What time did this train leave the station? And what time did the other train leave Atlanta?

Oh wait. Is that a different problem?

Ive always thought the loud ass horn was there for...

2009-03-19T06:59:00.000+05:30

Ive always thought the loud ass horn was there for a reason, if that isnt a good enough of a motivator, screw the kids

These made up situations are a waste of time. I've...

2009-03-03T11:26:00.000+05:30

These made up situations are a waste of time. I've always hated them. Why not put your time to use, finding out a way to not waste so much, and feed the starving kids that are dying needless everyday? Or launch some nukes and be done with them so that can stop being on commercials :P

In my Opininon, we don't know too many paremeters ...

2009-02-05T22:03:00.000+05:30

In my Opininon, we don't know too many paremeters that we are assuming, like (Train has no Driver) (Train can't stop) (etc...) when we read we assume that the solution is on us. In fact the problem is on whum create such games.

Of course I cannot say for sure since I have not b...

2008-12-07T09:02:00.000+05:30

Of course I cannot say for sure since I have not been faced with this dilemma, but I think I would let the train go where it may. If I diverted the train, I would be personally responsible for the death of one child. If I let the train go on its way without my input in the situation whatsoever, I will not be responsible.

You really missed the point all together. This exe...

2008-12-05T09:34:00.000+05:30

You really missed the point all together. This exercise isn't about the infinite external variables that the individual can think up, it is about the simple dilemma you face.

As someone pointed before, that is a version of th...

2008-11-14T00:36:00.000+05:30

As someone pointed before, that is a version of the Trolley problem introduced by Philippa Foot:

"A trolley is running out of control down a track. In its path are 5 people who have been tied to the track by a mad philosopher. Fortunately, you can flip a switch which will lead the trolley down a different track to safety. Unfortunately, there is a single person tied to that track. Should you flip the switch?"

Here we can't blame the majority by dullness or ignorance nor save the minority by farsightedness or wisdom. I guess most people would claim that not to divert the train would be an immoral act.

For those who approved of sacrificing one to save five, let's make it more interesting with another dilemma - The Fat Man - offered by Judith Thomson:

"As before, a trolley is hurtling down a track towards five people. You are on a bridge under which it will pass, and you can stop it by dropping a heavy weight in front of it. As it happens, there is a very fat man next to you - your only way to stop the trolley is to push him over the bridge and onto the track, killing him to save five. Should you proceed?"

If the train is moving so fast that three probabil...

2008-11-13T11:53:00.000+05:30

If the train is moving so fast that three probabilistically agile young children can't get out of its path, then attempting to switch rails will likely derail the train, killing everyone involved including yourself.

From the Desk of Sir Isaac Newton: "Do NOT screw with massive object's inertia."

Consider, maybe all the children are actually play...

2008-11-12T09:11:00.000+05:30

Consider, maybe all the children are actually playing together. Maybe they are playing a game of 'chicken'! As each child deems the train too close they run to the other track. The last child to run to the other track is the winner.

Unless you divert the train, in which case you might end up killing all the children as well as the people on the train when the train hits the switch at speed and derails.

Oh, you will likely end up dead as well as the derailing train piles all over you.

The real choice, allow a few children to possible die or kill lots of people by derailing the train!

the three kids that are stupid enough to play on t...

2008-10-12T04:35:00.000+05:30

the three kids that are stupid enough to play on the used track deserve what is coming to them. Don't divert the train to kill the only intelligent one there.

Children should not be playing on railroad tracks....

2008-09-12T07:19:00.000+05:30

Children should not be playing on railroad tracks. WTF? This will be a lesson to future generations. The more that die right now, the more kids will stay away in the future. Kill a child with a train today, save maybe ten. Kill three today, save them for life.

i love these comments.

2008-08-22T11:00:00.000+05:30

i love these comments.

Why not just yell out to them and tell them to get...

2008-07-31T09:19:00.000+05:30

Why not just yell out to them and tell them to get out of the way??

Its the difference between an accident and murder....

2008-07-29T17:29:00.000+05:30

Its the difference between an accident and murder.

If you change tracks you intentionally kill one kid. Murder.

If you do nothing then killing the other kids is simply an unfortunate accident.

Yeah, it's too bad we've figured out how to outsma...

2008-07-28T03:42:00.000+05:30

Yeah, it's too bad we've figured out how to outsmart "natural selection" with bike helmets, track interchanges, and ethics. I'm just happy that some intelligent bike-riding children escape the natural threat of stupid car drivers, so they can pass on their helmet-wearing genes. If you notice the sarcasm here, perhaps you'll also notice that this discussion was derailed before it began. Darwinian evolution is not an argument for Social Darwinism.

I like the explanation of why the one child should...

2008-07-23T09:01:00.000+05:30

I like the explanation of why the one child should be left alone, as he chose the "safe" track. But I also agree that NONE of them should be playing on train tracks. There was a kid in my neighborhood that everyone knew because he lost half a leg while playing on the train tracks. But...on a side note but related to this topic, the three on the known use track should know better -- and I agree that it's a bit like natural selection if they are killed. I feel that things like bike helmets have preserved some of the young 'uns that would have been done in by their own stupidity otherwise.

It is an interesting restatement of the trolley pr...

2008-07-22T02:44:00.000+05:30

It is an interesting restatement of the trolley problem but it fails to expound upon the moral issues involved and draws to an irrelevant conclusion. Is 'Remember that what's right isn't always popular... and what's popular isn't always right.' a reference to the “knowledgeable minority” versus the “foolish majority” or is it the decisive answer to the dilemma? The first is superfluous and misplaced the second is wildly presumptuous and unsubstantiated (both the morality and popular response). Considering the final phrase about erasers I would suspect that both statements are thought-terminating clichés.