this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
1335 points (99.3% liked)

Comic Strips

12607 readers
4908 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org 16 points 2 days ago (25 children)

The artist just immortalized in a strip that does not understand the trolley problem.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 17 points 2 days ago (17 children)

It understands it just fine. Agency is not a factor in the decision. The choice between action and inaction doesn't matter. People think it matters because people are driven by shortsighted emotions.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Agency might matter depending on societal context. 5 hot guys might be worse than 1 hot guy in a world with limited resources, for example.

Everyone knows that 5 of something is usually better than 1. The dilemma comes from finding a situation where that might not be true, and therein exploring some quirks of our own humanity.

It goes too far when people interpret these quirks as fundamental human traits, but there is genuine merit in testing oneself with fun hypotheticals

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 1 day ago

That's not a matter of agency, that's still a matter of the goodness of the action. You constructed a version where more of the magic hot guys is bad, and made the valence negative again. So now one is better, and agency still isn't a factor.

What's actually interesting is the doctor version. Kill one healthy person and harvest their organs to save five people from death? That, at first glance, puts agency back in the equation. But drag still thinks the key isn't agency. It's power. In the trolley version, you have no power over who's on the other track. You didn't choose that person in particular to die, they just happened to be in the way. In the doctor version, either you or the boss chose a healthy person to die. You got to pick. You cannot take responsibility for picking. And you cannot support a system in which another person picks either. But when random chance picks who has to die, that's fine. There's no abuse of power in that one. Killing who you need to kill in order to save others isn't abusive power. Picking who dies, when you could have picked someone else, that's abuse.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)