My last post today. Eric Yost quotes from Foot > A trolley is running out of control down a track. In its path are five > people who have been tied to the track by a mad philosopher. Fortunately, you > could 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 or do nothing? and writes: "What if the five people tied to the track are the mad philosopher's five philosophical minions, who, assuming that you will flip the switch, plan to repeat this "moral" experiment on other people?" ----- Exactly. The problem, as R. Paul suggests, is also operative in Austria, where they DO have trolleys -- thus making the 'trolley' paradox not a deterrent in Popper's Vienna (_pace_ McEvoy). In "Foot Massage", Phatic provides yet another counterexample. The arithmetic of it is easy enough -- as McEvoy could testify: 1 person tied to one track ------ vs. 5 persons tied to one track. This is called an 'utilitarian calculus' of 'rational decision'. What Foot opened the gate for is for innumerable further scenarios. In each, the utilitarian calculus should be developed case by case ("Is 5 a greater number than 1?", and so on). This from an online variant: "A trolley is careering out of control – it looks like it’s going to plow into the playground of the School For Gifted Violinists, and if it did you don’t know what sort of injuries it might cause but there would almost certainly be many deaths. You can sort of see how you could divert it by pushing a fat man off a bridge, but this might work or it might not – you can’t be sure. The fat guy kind of looks like Goebbels, but he’s wearing a white coat and a badge marked “Cancer Research Experts’ Convention” pop quiz hotshot – what do you do?" Speranza ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html