The trolley dilemma: scenario

Description of Scenario B: A train, 5 workers, a bridge, and a large man

Now, let's consider a variation of the dilemma. The out-of-control trolley keeps moving toward the five workers.

This time, there is no lever. You are standing on a bridge that passes over the track, and next to you is a very large man.

You realize that if you push this man onto the track, his body will stop the trolley, saving the five workers.

The question: Should you push the man? Would you?

The question now is: should you push the man off the bridge to save the five people? The numerical calculation is exactly the same as in the previous scenario: sacrifice one life to save five.

The majority response and why it differs from Scenario A

Despite the identical outcome, most people's response changes dramatically. Almost no one is willing to push the man.

This reveals that our moral decision-making is not based solely on a rational calculation of consequences.

Other, more emotional and intuitive factors come into play.

The real-life relevance of the dilemma (military decisions, self-driving car algorithms)

Although it may seem like a theoretical problem, this dilemma has very real applications. Governments make similar decisions in war contexts (collateral damage).

And self-driving car programmers must decide what the vehicle will do in an unavoidable accident.

Will it hit a pedestrian to save its occupants? The ethics of this dilemma are at the heart of modern technology.

Summary

The variation on the trolley dilemma involving the "heavy man" poses a moral conflict in which pushing one person to stop a train would save five workers. Although the outcome is the same as in the previous scenario involving a lever, most people are much more resistant to this action. The direct physical involvement profoundly changes the mor