• PsychedSy
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s never really a perfect argument because we’re not beholden to rationality. Utilitarianism comes after treating people well for me, so even if an action would result in a better outcome I may find it unethical.

      • PsychedSy
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Inaction to you might be me choosing a method I think is ethical but isn’t as effective as well.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You might have deluded yourself into thinking fence sitting or becoming a bystander is more ethical but it’s often not.

          It’s usually the easier choice and requires the least amount of effort and immediate danger, which is why most choose it, but that is not at all the same thing as ethical.

          If you walk away from the trolley lever, that’s still a choice and doesn’t save you from the dilemma.

          • PsychedSy
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not fence sitting. I have a very clear ethical position and I’ll argue for it vociferously.

            And the closest to moral answer is to kill the one person, but jump in front of the train myself. I don’t see much utility in such an extreme example.

            • aesthelete@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I have a very clear ethical position and I’ll argue for it vociferously.

              I think we’ve gotten a little vague here.

              What’s your “ethical position”? Is it to platform Nazis?