《公正该如何做是好》第一课Word文档格式.docx

《公正该如何做是好》第一课Word文档格式.docx

《《公正该如何做是好》第一课Word文档格式.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《《公正该如何做是好》第一课Word文档格式.docx（10页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

Raiseyourhands.Howmanywouldn'

t?

Howmanywouldgostraightahead?

Keepyourhandsupthoseofyouwhowouldgostraightahead.Ahandfulofpeoplewould,thevastmajoritywouldturn.Let'

shearfirst,nowweneedtobegintoinvestigatethereasonswhyyouthinkit'

stherightthingtodo.

sbeginwiththoseinthemajoritywhowouldturntogoontothesidetrack.Whywouldyoudoit?

Whatwouldbeyourreason?

Who'

swillingtovolunteerareason?

Goahead.Standup.Becauseitcan'

tberighttokillfivepeoplewhenyoucanonlykillonepersoninstead.Itwouldn'

tberighttokillfiveifyoucouldkillonepersoninstead.That'

sagoodreason.Whoelse?

Doeseverybodyagreewiththatreason?

Goahead.WellIwasthinkingit'

sthesamereasonon9/11withregardtothepeoplewhoflewtheplaneintothePennsylvaniafieldasheroesbecausetheychosetokillthepeopleontheplaneandnotkillmorepeopleinbigbuildings.Sotheprincipletherewasthesameon9/11.It'

satragiccircumstancebutbettertokillonesothatfivecanlive,isthatthereasonmostofyouhad,thoseofyouwhowouldturn?

Yes?

shearnowfromthoseintheminority,thosewhowouldn'

tturn.Yes.Well,Ithinkthat'

sthesametypeofmentalitythatjustifiesgenocideandtotalitarianism.Inordertosaveonetypeofrace,youwipeouttheother.Sowhatwouldyoudointhiscase?

Youwould,toavoidthehorrorsofgenocide,youwouldcrashintothefiveandkillthem?

Presumably,yes.Youwould?

-Yeah.Okay.Whoelse?

That'

sabraveanswer.Thankyou.

sconsideranothertrolleycarcaseandseewhetherthoseofyouinthemajoritywanttoadheretotheprinciple:

"

betterthatoneshoulddiesothatfiveshouldlive."

Thistimeyou'

renotthedriverofthetrolleycar,you'

reanonlooker.You'

restandingonabridgeoverlookingatrolleycartrack.Anddownthetrackcomesatrolleycar,attheendofthetrackarefiveworkers,thebrakesdon'

twork,thetrolleycarisabouttocareenintothefiveandkillthem.Andnow,you'

renotthedriver,youreallyfeelhelplessuntilyounoticestandingnexttoyou,leaningoverthebridgeisaveryfatman.Andyoucouldgivehimashove.Hewouldfalloverthebridgeontothetrackrightinthewayofthetrolleycar.Hewoulddiebuthewouldsparethefive.Now,howmanywouldpushthefatmanoverthebridge?

Raiseyourhand.

Howmanywouldn'

Mostpeoplewouldn'

t.Here'

stheobviousquestion.Whatbecameoftheprinciple"

bettertosavefivelives

evenifitmeanssacrificingone?

"

Whatbecameoftheprinciple

thatalmosteveryoneendorsedinthefirstcase?

Ineedtohearfromsomeonewhowasinthemajorityinbothcases.Howdoyouexplainthedifferencebetweenthetwo?

Yes.Thesecondone,Iguess,involvesanactivechoiceofpushingapersondown

whichIguessthatpersonhimselfwouldotherwisenothavebeeninvolvedinthesituationatall.Andsotochooseonhisbehalf,Iguess,toinvolvehiminsomethingthatheotherwisewouldhaveescapedis,Iguess,morethanwhatyouhaveinthefirstcasewherethethreeparties,thedriverandthetwosetsofworkers,arealready,Iguess,inthesituation.Buttheguyworking,theoneonthetrackofftotheside,hedidn'

tchoosetosacrificehislifeanymorethanthefatmandid,didhe?

strue,buthewasonthetracksand...Thisguywasonthebridge.

Goahead,youcancomebackifyouwant.Allright.It'

sahardquestion.Youdidwell.Youdidverywell.It'

sahardquestion.

Whoelsecanfindawayofreconcilingthereactionofthemajorityinthesetwocases?

Yes.Well,Iguessinthefirstcasewhereyouhavetheoneworkerandthefive,it'

sachoicebetweenthosetwoandyouhavetomakeacertainchoiceandpeoplearegoingtodiebecauseofthetrolleycar,notnecessarilybecauseofyourdirectactions.Thetrolleycarisarunawaything

andyou'

remakingasplitsecondchoice.Whereaspushingthefatmanoverisanactualactofmurderonyourpart.Youhavecontroloverthatwhereasyoumaynothavecontroloverthetrolleycar.SoIthinkit'

saslightlydifferentsituation.Allright,whohasareply?

sgood.Whohasaway?

Whowantstoreply?

Isthatawayoutofthis?

Idon'

tthinkthat'

saverygoodreasonbecauseyouchooseto-eitherwayyouhavetochoosewhodiesbecauseyoueitherchoosetoturnandkilltheperson,whichisanactofconsciousthoughttoturn,oryouchoosetopushthefatmanoverwhichisalsoanactive,consciousaction.Soeitherway,you'

remakingachoice.Doyouwanttoreply?

I'

mnotreallysurethatthat'

sthecase.Itjuststillseemskindofdifferent.Theactofactuallypushingsomeoneoverontothetracksandkillinghim,youareactuallykillinghimyourself.You'

repushinghimwithyourownhands.You'

repushinghimandthat'

sdifferentthansteeringsomethingthatisgoingtocause

deathintoanother.Youknow,itdoesn'

treallysoundrightsayingitnow.

No,no.It'

sgood.It'

sgood.What'

syourname?

Andrew.Andrew.Letmeaskyouthisquestion,Andrew.Yes.Supposestandingonthebridgenexttothefatman,Ididn'

thavetopushhim,supposehewasstandingoveratrapdoorthatIcouldopenbyturningasteeringwheellikethat.Wouldyouturn?

Forsomereason,thatstilljustseemsmorewrong.Right?

Imean,maybeifyouaccidentallylikeleanedintothesteeringwheelorsomethinglikethat.But...Orsaythatthecarishurtlingtowardsaswitchthatwilldropthetrap.ThenIcouldagreewiththat.That'

sallright.Fairenough.Itstillseemswronginawaythatitdoesn'

tseemwronginthefirstcasetoturn,yousay.Andinanotherway,Imean,inthefirstsituationyou'

reinvolveddirectlywiththesituation.Inthesecondone,you'

reanonlookeraswell.Allright.-Soyouhavethechoiceofbecominginvolvedornotbypushingthefatman.Allright.Let'

sforgetforthemomentaboutthiscase.

That'

sgood.Let'

simagineadifferentcase.Thistimeyou'

readoctorinanemergencyroomandsixpatientscometoyou.They'

vebeeninaterribletrolleycarwreck.Fiveofthemsustainmoderateinjuries,oneisseverelyinjured,youcouldspendalldaycaringfortheoneseverelyinjuredvictimbutinthattime,thefivewoulddie.Oryoucouldlookafterthefive,restorethemtohealthbutduringthattime,theoneseverelyinjuredpersonwoulddie.Howmanywouldsavethefive?

Nowasthedoctor,howmanywouldsavetheone?

Veryfewpeople,justahandfulofpeople.Samereason,Iassume.Onelifeversusfive?

Nowconsideranotherdoctorcase.Thistime,you'

reatransplantsurgeonandyouhavefivepatients,eachindesperateneedofanorgantransplantinordertosurvive.Oneneedsaheart,onealung,oneakidney,onealiver,andthefifthapancreas.Andyouhavenoorgandonors.Youareabouttoseethemdie.Andthenitoccurstoyouthatinthenextroomthere'

sahealthyguywhocameinforacheck-up.Andhe'

s–youlikethat–andhe'

stakinganap,youcouldgoinveryquietly,yankoutthefiveorgans,thatpersonwoulddie,butyoucouldsavethefive.Howmanywoulddoit?

Anyone?

Howmany?

Putyourhandsupifyouwoulddoit.Anyoneinthebalcony?

Iwould.Youwould?

Becareful,don'

tleanovertoomuch.Howmanywouldn'

Allright.Whatdoyousay?

Speakupinthebalcony,youwhowouldyankouttheorgans.Why?

dactuallyliketoexploreaslightlyalternatepossibilityofjusttakingtheoneofthefivewhoneedsanorganwhodiesfirstandusingtheirfourhealthyorganstosavetheotherfour.That'

saprettygoodidea.That'

sagreatideaexceptforthefactthatyoujustwreckedthephilosophicalpoint.

sstepbackfromthesestoriesandtheseargumentstonoticeacoupleofthingsaboutthewaytheargumentshavebeguntounfold.Certainmoralprincipleshavealreadybeguntoemergefromthediscussionswe'

vehad.Andlet'

sconsiderwhatthosemoralprincipleslooklike.Thefirstmoralprinciplethatemergedinthediscussionsaidtherightthingtodo,themoralthingtododependsontheconsequencesthatwillresultfromyouraction.Attheendoftheday,betterthatfiveshouldliveevenifonemustdie.That'

sanexampleofconsequentialistmoralreasoning.Consequentialistmoralreasoninglocatesmoralityintheconsequencesofanact,inthestateoftheworldthatwillresultfromthethingyoudo.Butthenwewentalittlefurther,weconsideredthoseothercasesandpeopleweren'

tsosureaboutconsequentialistmoralreasoning.Whenpeoplehesitatedtopushthefatmanoverthebridgeortoyankouttheorgansoftheinnocentpatient,peoplegesturedtowardreasonshavingtodowiththeintrinsicqualityoftheactitself,consequencesbewhattheymay.

Peoplewerereluctant.Peoplethoughtitwasjustwrong,categoricallywrong,tokillaperson,aninnocentperson,evenforthesakeofsavingfivelives.Atleastpeoplethoughtthatinthesecondversionofeachstoryweconsider